Tahts-a-dats-ago

With some (people) NM is in a damned if they do, and damned if they don't situation. I've seen a number of people state that they won't buy the Legend because it didn't have an iron bias setting, but now that NM is doing an update that will add that feature.....  

Not one person has stated they've had a change in opinion (and will now buy the Legend) but several can't seem to get over the fact that their demand has been granted.

To me the really odd thing in all of this "uproar" is the fact that every metal detector made has parameters (from the engineers) that are not user adjustable. That includes Minelab's general hobby machines. Those parameters were chosen by design - with the intention of providing the optimum performance for a general use machine. Naturally those parameters (chosen) won't be optimum in all situations, but we don't see a bunch of complaints with regards to the algorithms, frequency bias, etc.. chosen by Minelab's engineers. Presumably most users accept the fact that the engineers know more about the subject than the average user does.

To my knowledge Minelab has offered several updates for the Equinox, with the potential being fairly likely that there will be future updates too. Despite that I have yet to read a comment about having to buy the Equinox and hoping Minelab will someday make it better with an update. The same goes with XP and their flagship machines.

I know of a number of machines that are quite good at separating good targets in a bed of iron trash. To my knowledge the only machines that featured an adjustable iron bias setting are a few Minelab models - and it seems that those who are most adamant about an iron bias setting on the Legend are Minelab users. Maybe that's just a coincidence, or maybe it isn't. I do find it a bit amusing that some of the same people who proclaimed the Legend to be a copy of the Equinox, are now demanding an Equinox feature on the Legend.

It does seem as though some Legend naysayers aren't really interested in the Legend itself, or making the Legend a better machine, as much as they are interested in picking the Legend (and Dilek) apart.

The good news is that NM is once again delivering what the people have asked for. That should be commended, not ridiculed and demeaned via questions designed to imply a belief that Dilek/NM is less than honest.

I see this as somewhat of a tightrope situation for NM. While I personally prefer the ability to adjust a machine to my liking, I can't help but recalling the many complaints people had with the V3i from Whites. By far the biggest complaint was its complexity. Everything was adjustable on the V3i and lots of users dialed themselves into performance that was worse than that of the stock programs.

I think NM is trying to provide optimum performance while avoiding (to the extent possible) the pratfall of an overly complex machine. The Legend's target audience is wide - encompassing potential users that range from zero experience to users with decades of experience. That broad range makes matters a bit difficult when it comes to adjustments available and any performance gains or losses.

My own opinion is that NM will thread the needle and Legend users will enjoy a powerful machine that performs very well. I base that opinion on NM's history of providing machines that are very competitive performance-wise and pricewise. 

I know absolutely nothing about finding natural gold or mining, but your post(s) (journal entries) are fascinating. Thanks for taking the time to share the journal with us.

I pre-ordered the Legend (pro pack) late last week. First time I've decided to purchase a newly introduced metal detector, but I'm fairly confident that the Legend will be a very good machine (based on owning other NM machines and my satisfaction with their performance). I should sell one or two of my current machines, but I just can't bring myself to doing so at this point.

The MX5 was one of my favorite machines ever (the other was the V3i). Simple to use, effective, and fun. If everything works as it should, I think you got a great deal.

This thread highlights my reasons for believing this forum is the single best resource available for those of us who wish to learn more about metal detecting, the machines we use, and the science behind it all.

I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that I have been guilty of believing frequency performance pertained to the type of metal buried; that despite the fact that every owner's manual I've read clearly mentions size (of target) when discussing the benefits of various frequencies. For some reason - likely due to my preference for silver coins - I had always locked onto the part that mentioned large silver coins and skipped right over the large part.

Thanks to Steve's ability to explain things in a clear, concise, manner: I am now better informed and (hopefully) better equipped to find the targets that I seek most often.

From my standpoint NM is being very prudent in their approach. If their diligence results in a (delivered) machine that works correctly, without the need for updates to correct an issue, then both the company and the customer are well served.

I like the additional park and field modes and look forward to other enhancements not mentioned by Dilek. As mentioned by another member, I’d like to see the addition of a mineralization bar as well as a relic mode. As things stand, I will be purchasing a Legend at some point in the near future.

Having read several comments throughout my internet travels (some of which have been quite unflattering) regarding the lack of an “iron bias” feature, I am a bit confused about the concern some have expressed. Perhaps my confusion stems from the fact that I’ve never used the competitor’s machine (featuring that option) but it (iron bias) doesn’t seem like a feature that I’d desire. 

My understanding is that “iron bias” is a filter that weights (ferrous or non-ferrous) the signal given for a target that has both characteristics (ferrous and non-ferrous) and that the degree of weighting chosen can make an “iffy” target signal as ferrous, or non-ferrous (depending upon the degree of weighting chosen by the user). (Please correct me if my understanding is not correct)

I’ve seen several experienced users caution others to use “iron bias” very sparingly, or not at all, since its use can result in good targets being passed by.

If my understanding (of iron bias) is correct, and there is a good chance that my understanding is not correct, then it seems (to me anyway) that the best way use iron bias is to leave it off and make the dig decision based on the signal received and user inclination. In fact, it seems that the use of iron bias would muddle the signal - making a dig decision more apt to be one of pure chance.

I much prefer the fe-check and the ability to set tone breaks, notch volume, etc...
 

9 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

I’d have to disagree about Apex vs Vanquish performance. A Vanquish is basically a stripped down Equinox, and rivals or equals Equinox performance in many situations. The Apex really is not in the same league when it comes to actual performance, especially the ability to retain depth and a good target id in bad ground. I could nugget hunt effectively with a Vanquish and small coil in bad ground, even lacking a manual ground balance, while the Apex falls far short.

I should clarify my thoughts a bit.

I have very little time on the Vanquish - a bit in my own yard (just to get somewhat accustomed to the Vanquish) and a bit of use in an iron-littered site. For me the Apex did better in the iron-littered site. That could be the result of several things: a larger coil on the Vanquish, me not having much time on the Vanquish, and the mild soil conditions at that site.

I have no doubt that the Vanquish is deeper than the Apex. I think the Apex has OK depth abilities - with a probable maximum (stock coil) of 9-10 inches on a quarter (mild soil). To date the deepest target, I've retrieved (Apex), was a key at a legitimate 8 inches; the tone was clear and there was a bit of iron nearby the target. I didn't pay much attention to the target ID (don't recall what it was) but I do know that it bounced around a bit. 

On those rare occasions when I've gotten the coil over a clean target (no trash nearby) I've found the Apex to have a steady target ID (either solid or moving very little) but I haven't dug any clean (coin) targets that were more than 5-6 inches in depth (with the Apex). I don't pay much attention to the target ID numbers on any of my machines - for the most part if I get a good tone (even if it is just one-way and has some iron grunts to it) I dig. Very often I find trash in the same hole (as a good target).

I suspect that with more time on the Vanquish I'd likely view it in a more positive light (speaking strictly with regards to iron-littered sites). In a park, with modern trash, I have no doubt that the Vanquish is the better performing machine (I very seldom hunt parks). On a saltwater beach I'd guess that the two are very close, with the nod likely going to the Vanquish (depth). As for build quality - I think the Apex is leaps and bounds better (than the Vanquish).

I know absolutely nothing about nugget hunting. I'd love to try it at some point (not an option in NJ). I would guess that the Apex would fail miserably to that regard.

I purchased my Apex in the spring of 2021. I updated the software a day or two after the update was available. At this point I don't really recall how much the update improved things, but I do believe the update made target ID's a bit more stable (going on memory).

I bought the Apex because I believed it would be a fun machine to use but wasn't expecting much (based on reviews) when it comes to hunting in iron. To that point I've been pleasantly surprised: the Apex isn't a demon in the iron, but it performs much better than I had assumed it would. I'm sure that is helped by the fact that I leave the small coil (Ripper?) on all the time, and I tend to be a slow, rather methodical, hunter anyway.

The Apex is no match for my Deus, or my ORX, or my Anfibio, or my Kruzer, or my Vista X - but I don't expect it to perform on a level that those machines can. In my experience the Apex is better (than my machines mentioned) in wet salt conditions, but its real value is found in its simplicity and the amount of fun that it provides. I enjoy using it and it is a simple enough machine that I can loan it out to the neighbor's kids when they choose to tag along.

I actually prefer the wireless headphones (Apex) to those on my other machines - I think they're better performing and better build quality. I think the overall build quality (Apex) is excellent.

I purchased the Vanquish 440 for my wife (she likes the color) and haven't used it much, other than learning it a bit so I could show her how to use it. For me, the Apex is the better machine (build wise and performance wise). It's not that I think the Vanquish is a bad machine, I just find the Apex to be the better of the two. I mostly hunt iron-littered sites and find the Apex to be better (in such sites) than the Vanquish. (The soil tends to be quite mild in most of the sites I hunt)

Admittedly, I would likely be less pleased if I had experienced some of the erratic issues that others have reported but thus far, I have not had such problems. I do think there is ample room for improvements, but I'm doubtful that the enhancements (I'd like to see on the Apex) could be had at the current price point. If the Apex cost what my other machines cost, I'd be disappointed with the Apex (and would not have purchased it). At its price point, I think the Apex is a solid machine: it doesn't WOW me with its performance (unlike some of my other machines) but it hasn't disappointed me either.

36 minutes ago, palzynski said:

Agree . Sometimes I wonder if the Garretts top managers have ever used their Apex in the field   ... Probably not , otherwise they would have fixed all these issues ... 

 

Garrett had videos out of the engineer and someone in upper management using the Apex. I have no idea of what issues those two noted or addressed. 

I like your suggestions.

I'd add:

5. User adjustable tone breaks. I'd also like to have the ability to assign a preferred tone to each tone bin - example being a high tone to the bin where nickels would typically be.

Ideally, my hope is that Garrett releases a new, lightweight, waterproof (or water/dust resistant) version of the V3i. A fast (better separation and unmasking) V3i with a good ground balance system would be very close to the ideal metal detector in my mind. 

Yes.

Very interesting test results. I think the lesson gleaned (for me anyway) is that coil choice, for the conditions, is very important. Maybe I missed something?

For certain areas that I hunt, I've long preferred concentric coils because (for me) they seem to perform better in those conditions. A number of people have told me I'm wrong, but that hasn't changed the fact that I've had better results (certain sites) with a concentric coil.

Thanks for taking the time to do the test and post your results.

Does the Legend have either iron volume (like the multi Kruzer) or notch volume (like the Anfibio multi)? 

I haven't seen either mentioned (regarding the Legend) but would be surprised if notch volume isn't a feature on the Legend. 

In reflecting upon all that I am thankful for, I realized that this forum (and the members) justifies specific mention.

Thanks to my fellow forum members. I have learned a lot from you and am grateful that you share your knowledge.

There are a few members who I wish to specifically thank, but the list is far from complete and my thanks extend to all members.

Chase Goldman - Thank you for your willingness to respond to questions, your extensive knowledge, and your desire to help all of your fellow forum members.

Geotech (Carl Moreland) - Thank you for explaining the technology behind metal detectors, and giving us an inside look as to what it takes to create and build metal detectors. I wish you had the backing necessary to bring all of your ideas to market. I also wish I had the ability to fully comprehend the technical aspects.

Dilek - Thank you for your passion, for your willingness to directly engage customers, and for listening. I wish every manufacturer had a Dilek in their executive staff.

Steve Herschbach - Thank you for all that you do to provide us with this amazing opportunity to learn. Thank you for sharing your extensive knowledge, all that you do to answer questions, explain things, and teaching us how to be better detectorists. 

Whether Minelab's "obsolete" statement is arrogant or pompous will likewise be a point of contention (among metal detecting enthusiasts) for years to come. To be honest I think the statement was both arrogant and pompous, but that isn't really the point behind the statement.

Is it an accurate statement?

In the sense that single frequency metal detectors are still widely used - no. In the sense that even Minelab itself states that there are benefits to single frequency - no, the statement isn't accurate. In the sense that the market seems to be moving toward simultaneous frequency machines - yes, the statement is accurate. And I would expect that trend to continue - until new technology begins to replace it.

But that isn't the point either.

Minelab's 'obsolete' statement was marketing genius. Sure it was a bit off-putting to many, but it did exactly what it was intended to do: draw people in. The metal detecting community was both outraged and intrigued, and all attention was on Minelab's product. 

In a way I'm reminded of the "New Coke" release back in the 80's. At the time it was roundly criticized as the mistake of the century - a complete flop in every sense. It was Coke's response to Pepsi - which had been tearing huge chunks out of Coke's market share (Pepsi outsold Coke - in the US - in packages; Coke still dominated in syrup). People started hoarding the regular Coca-Cola and New Coke brought plummeting sales to Coca-Cola. Soon Coca-Cola responded by introducing "Original Coke" back to the market and Coca-Cola market share began to skyrocket. Coke quickly reversed Pepsi's gains, and dominates (to this day) the cola market.

Coke's move was controversial. Most claim it was a horrendous error. I'm convinced that it was a calculated example of genius marketing - one that quickly put Coke's competition in the rear-view mirror.

To a lesser extent I think Minelab's statement was another example of a calculated marketing move - one that worked brilliantly.

2 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

While having the upper HF single frequencies of the two Deus I HF coils (56+ khz and 74+ khz) would be nice to have, Deus II supports up to 40+ khz natively which more than covers the upper end of the frequency range in which I spend 99% of my time detecting  when using the HF coils.

Is it possible that a higher frequency coil would not have the SMF performance of the frequency range with the coils that will be available for the Deus II?

Example: would 4khz and 20 khz (transmitted/received at same time) have a greater performance than 45 khz and 61 khz (transmitted/received at the same time)?

I'm asking because the high frequency coils (Deus) work very well, so I am a bit confused as to why a high frequency coil isn't (yet) offered with the Deus II.

Happy Thanksgiving to all. 

Dilek said (interview on Treasure Talk) she was working to get the warranty extended beyond two years. I don't recall if she said how long of an extension she was trying to get.

I received an email (from ML) asking me to go to a link and fill out a survey. The survey mostly consisted of questions regarding thoughts on competitors, Minelab itself, what I'm looking for in a metal detector, and how Minelab could improve.

I have never (previously) received such an email from Minelab, and took it as an indication of several things:

1. Minelab is paying attention to the competition and to the consumer.

2. Minelab sees challenges coming and plans to meet those challenges head-on.

3. Minelab sees room for improvement and is taking steps to make those improvements.

I did find it a bit odd that Minelab's survey included Whites as a competitor, but I suppose that's due to there being a lot of Whites machines still in use. It is possible that ML thinks it possible that Garretts will release machines under the Whites label at some point in the future.

From the USA standpoint it was a bit odd that ML also included Quest as a competitor, but that inclusion makes a lot of sense in other markets (where Quest seems to have a decent share of the market).

Minelab's survey does include Fisher and Bounty Hunter, but no mention of Teknetics. Is that indicative of something, or a simple oversight?

It is no surprise that ML is eager to protect/grow its market share; however I am still pleased in knowing that ML clearly intends to rise to the challenge presented by the competition. That is great news (though expected news) for all who enjoy metal detecting.

I do wonder what caused the survey. Was it the new teaser from XP? The tease from NM? Something else, or just business as usual?

I am inclined to believe the new XP machine is likely to be innovative, feature-rich, and priced accordingly. If the performance is there (real or perceived) consumers will justify the pricing by way of opening their wallets in gleeful anticipation.

That said I also believe XP would be wise to take note of current trend (set by their competition) toward decreased prices for very capable machines. At the very least, XP would seemingly be served well if they made an effort to seriously compete in that segment of the market.

With modern machines (for the most part) being software based, I am a bit surprised that we have yet to see a manufacturer offer one machine that can target multiple segments of the market. At this point software delivery is relatively routine; click a link or two, pay the amount required, and download a bunch of new features/performance.

From the manufacturer’s standpoint such a system offers significant advantages:

Tool and die costs are spread out over multiple (software) variations of the same machine. Physically the base model would be the same exact machine as the premium model. Given XP’s excellent ergonomics, I would think they can use the exact same platform they’re currently using for the Deus (further spreading the costs of manufacturing).

A company portal (for loading the new software) allows the manufacturer the ability to bypass the middleman (dealers) and the associated commissions that are incurred - increasing profit margins and presumably allowing for better prices for the consumer.

Up-selling consumers to more features/performance is simplified, and customer retention is far more likely when top-line performance/features can be realized for a few hundred dollars (verses spending $800+ for a competitor’s machine).

There are significant advantages for the consumer too:

A base model offers the consumer the opportunity to try a machine at a lower financial risk, while retaining the option of upgrading their machine to a top-level machine (should they decide to) for a relatively minor investment.

The investment (in a top line model) is more easily spread out over time. Buy the base model then update to the top line model later (when desired and the money is on hand).

Suppose XP offered a base SMF model at a targeted retail price somewhere around $500-$600. Make it capable of using the ORX wireless backphones (purchased separately) but ship it with the wired phones. Keep it fairly simple, but with enough features/performance to compete favorably with machines like the Vanquish 540, the Apex, and perhaps even the Equinox 600.

Want more?

Buy and install the premium software (say for $300) and now your machine is unlocked, with all the features and performance that XP is capable of delivering. The machine is now capable of working with the Ws4 backphones and can compete (favorably) with the competition’s top line models. Bundle the unlocked software with the Ws4 backphones and a MI6 pinpointer (at a price that makes that package attractive).

I’m not saying that such a business model should happen (concerning metal detectors) or even that it will happen. I’m just surprised that it hasn’t.
 

3 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

 

 

 

Yeah not everyone enjoys speculating I suppose, but I'm weird that way because that's what I think is one of the thing that is fun about forums, speculating on what might be and the anticipation of that.  I don't care if I'm wrong or inaccurate.  It doesn't cost anything, stimulates discussion, and perhaps sends a message to the manufacturers on what hard core detectorists want in a detector.  To that point...

 

Great points, Melano, and that makes a great thread segue into what else people might want XP to include as features anticipating that it will be a MF detector - 

• I personally would like to see XP retain the Deus fully wireless ecosystem but provide a more elegant way to shift into a water friendly mode.  I like having the coil be wireless from the control box for most situations because it enables quick coil switching and allows you to place the control box where you think it is most convenient like on a vest or to tuck it away and just use the phones.
• I would like it to retain the multiple single frequency feature.
• I am hoping that MF improves Deus salt beach performance and Target ID at depth in mineralized soil.  If XP can make it competitive with Tarsacci in this regard, then we might actually have something to sit up and take notice.  Use of MF for better ferrous target filtering (along the lines of ML's Equinox iron bias feature) would also be good.
• It would be great if XP would allow the user, as an advanced feature, to continuously or discretely adjust the MF frequency weighting in some manner and to enable adjustments in signal processing to be SEPARATE from frequency weighting adjustments (e.g., on Equinox adjustments in signal processing and weighting are adjusted together by shifting the search profiles/modes - Park/Field/Beach/Gold)
• XP made some great tweaks to the user interface with Orx (pop up Target ID and iron probability bar) and I would like to see those migrate to the new detector as options if it is going to use a similar interface but also retain the Deus ability to cycle back and forth between the modes using the +/- buttons (which was not something the ORX was able to do). 
• I like how Orx utilized the pinpoint button as a ground grab button for quick "auto" GB adjustment.  I think the XP implementation of pinpoint mode on Deus and Orx is cumbersome. A dedicated pinpoint trigger or toggle membrane would be more convenient rather than having to switch between buttons to get in and out of pinpoint mode.  XP should separate the non-motion mode switching menu from pinpoint mode.
• XP needs to ditch their cumbersome and fragile coil charging clips in favor of something more robust and convenient.  Also, they need to update to USB C and the industry standard Power Delivery spec for charging their accessories.
• Target Auto scoop and plug digging/finds pouch placing would also be welcome. 

Anyway, those are some of my thoughts in what I am looking for in the next XP detector.  Would like to hear what other people are looking for.

I'd like to see all of the suggestions made by Chase.

While the odds are that the new offering won't be a simple matter of a new MF coil and an update for the current remote, that would be my preference. From the consumer's standpoint, that would be the most financially prudent option.

If XP is putting out an entirely new machine, I'd like to see the new remote be a bit larger and easier to read (without reading glasses). I'd love a color screen (to this date I still think the V3i screen is the best on the market).

I'd like to see the option to normalize VDI numbers at a frequency of the user's choice - mostly so the user could select a choice that allows for a larger spread (of the numbers) at the upper end of the scale.

I'd like to see an option similar to the analyze function found in the V3i pinpoint mode - where the strength of each frequency (for the target) is shown.

I'd like the new machine to be compatible with the W4 backphones, and the MI6 pinpointer.

I'd like the new machine to be compatible with the current coils.

I'd like the new remote to be very water/dust resistant (capable of withstanding heavy rain).

On the various forums (that I read) a number of people have cited Minelab’s (smf) head start, and their patents, as a major road-block in Nokta-Makro’s path. That’s certainly a logical point, and likely the safe money bet.

But...

Nokta-Makro (Dilek) has been rather forward in stating their intent to produce a machine that competes head-to-head with the Nox 800 - and offer more for less.

Marketing hype?

Maybe.

It could be that the “more” are features - bells and whistles mostly. Or it could be that NM found a new way to “skin the cat” and their new (smf) machine will offer more performance and more features; all without infringing upon a single patent.

I’m not pretending that is the case, but I’m not going to categorically ignore the possibility either (no matter how unlikely it is).

I have zero doubt that NM engineers know what makes the Nox 800 tick. They know its capabilities. It would be unreasonable to think NM doesn’t have several Nox 800's in their possession. (And Minelab will have several of the new NM machines in their possession, so they can see how it works - once that machine is released)

There is a reason why NM (Dilek) has worded statements in the manner that she has. Dilek is a very astute person; she isn’t about to make grandiose claims that will come back to bite her at a later date. Her words/statements have been carefully chosen.

For many avid hunters Dilek is Nokta-Makro. She has spent considerable energy/time cultivating our trust and respect. Dilek has gone out of her way to provide outstanding service countless times: she has made Nokta-Makro an incredible success story, and a force to be reckoned with. She isn’t going to chance all that by making claims that have no possibility of being valid: She is far too intelligent to do that.

For me - if it was anyone else (from any other company) making statements along the lines of directly competing with the 800lb gorilla that is the Nox; I’d immediately discount those comments as being marketing nonsense. As it is, I trust that Dilek knows a lot more than I do, and if she says their new machine will compete directly - she believes it. And I’m inclined to believe the claims are very possible. Call it blind faith in someone who has earned my trust.
 

5 minutes ago, rvpopeye said:

Welcome in from the dark side Tahts !

Quite the pile of detectors you have there , which one gets the most use ?

Kick the coals in the campfire and sit down for a while ....did you find anything good lately ?

Not me... But I'm not giving up that easy.

 

 

Thanks for the welcome.

I haven't been hunting for a bit now - too hot and family matters (my father has cancer) that matter far more.

Once I can get back to hunting the Deus will get the use for awhile anyway  - I need to learn that machine so I know what it is telling me (better). After that - all but the Compadre and Vanquish will be used. The compadre is mostly a loaner for the neighbor's grandson (when he wants to hunt with me). The Vanquish is my wife's machine, so I only "use" it when I'm helping her learn it.

I've long been a lurker here, and have learned a lot in the process (thanks to all for sharing your knowledge). And thanks to Steve for sharing his incredible wealth of knowledge.

I live in southern NJ (close to the DE bay). Mostly I hunt old permissions - sites that date back 200+ years. For me it is more about the hunt than it is about the find. I like the unknown aspect of it - who lost it, how did it impact them, what was their life like, etc..

My user name is derived from a Louis L'Amour book - Tahts-a-dats-ago was a character in one of his books (I used to collect books by L'Amour). I mention that because people often ask where the moniker came from.

My current machines:

Makro multi Kruzer

Nokta-Makro Anfibio (multi)

Tesoro Compadre

Garrett Apex

XP ORX

XP Deus

Minelab Vanquish 440 (bought it for my wife)

Best of luck to all