shopkins1994

1 hour ago, CPT_GhostLight said:

I'm sure other folks here can give a more detailed and more accurate explanation, but the effect is caused by the roll of quarters being laid on its side. You are essentially creating coins on edge orientation, and while you'd think 40 coins contacting each other on edge would give a big signal, that's not the case. Each coin creates its own eddy current from being energized by the coil (in the same way links in a chain do) and  the detector is basically reading the one or two edge oriented coins at a time per swing even though they are touching. So the entire roll of coins doesn't create one big eddy current, just 40 tiny ones, and most of them are missed in the sweep. Sweeping length of the roll, you are sweeping across the thinnest part of the coin so the response is small to missed. When you changed your swing 90 degrees, you swept across the length of the coin in the roll and it gave a larger response in some programs. If you had stood the roll on end, it would have read similar to one flat oriented quarter for the same reason, because the detector is reading only one or two coins at a time. I hope that makes some sense.

I'm not so sure about that. A few of the modes do detect it both directions. 

On 3/2/2022 at 1:14 PM, CPT_GhostLight said:

With all the advanced settings possibilities, the D2 looks pretty daunting for someone who is not familiar with the XP platform. Without getting into other metal detector comparisons, how easy is this detector to get out and use with no experience on a Deus? I know it has a lot of customization possibilties and some settings need to be altered to enhance performance in different soils and scenarios. So what kind of learning curve is someone new to XP looking at?

It’s not very hard. It’s point-and-shoot like the equinox 800. However, unlike the equinox, you can configure it to get the items left behind by everyone else. That’s what you need to learn to do with it. -sam 

Any thoughts on my test with the default programs? I didn’t  changed any settings. These are default programs straight from turning on the Deus 2.  
 

On 2/21/2022 at 1:51 PM, Chase Goldman said:

 

I hear what you are saying, shopkins, and in a processing challenged, ragged edge implementation, what you are saying makes sense..  However, this is not XP's first sophisticated detector signal processing rodeo.  They have been continuously learning from the iterations of the Deus platform and probably have led the industry in processing speed(as evidenced by recovery speed) as they set the bar with Deus with ML not catching up in this regard until Equinox,  Furthermore, simply based on observing from the outside in, it is apparent that the Deus 2 must have the power to spare simply based on the range of reactivities/recovery speeds supported plus the added load of FMF signal processing supported.  As such, the processing cycles are likely fixed and if good sw programming discipline is used there is plenty of processing headroom budgeted during every processing cycle to account for processing time slices for all of the possible applied filters that can be applied (e.g., disc, bcap, silencer, notch, etc.), without impacting the ability for the processor to get its job done in the allotted cycle time.  Therefore, tweaking these filters or turning them off should have no effect on the ability of the D2 to process the signal under its alloted maximum processing load.  To put it anotherway, the actual worst case processing time for the D2 even accounting for all filters activated is probably only a fraction of the allowable maximum processing time slice window you illustrated in your video.

That all being said, there is something to also be said for minimizing filters to the extent necessary to enable you to get the clearest "picture" of the target.  There are always tradeoffs, and the skilled detectorist is the one who is knowledgeable of what the settings do and their tradeoffs and how to appropriately balance them.

I will reiterate that based on my usage so far, XP (like ML with the Nox) has done a great job of establishing great out of the box default settings eliminating a lot of the balancing/optimization guesswork for the end user, especially the inexperienced user.  My recommendation for new users is to start with the defaults and tweak as little as necessary from there rather than going to "ground zero".  This enables you to learn the machine and mitigates the possibility of going into a grossly suboptimal setup similar to what shopkins encountered with beach mode.

On the flip side, if you are getting good results from this approach.  More power to you!  Go with what works, I just hesitate to recommend to folks just starting out with the D2 to drastically adjust away from the default settings simply based on what someone else is doing without a lot of knowledge about the relevant environmental conditions (mineralization, trash density, EMI), skill level, or detecting target objectives and how they might apply to them.

Good luck and HH.

I appreciate you taking the time to write a big response -- it helps us all when someone takes the time to write a lot of info.

To explain the way the electronic manufacturing world works (and a lot of consumer industries) is this example for XP. These numbers are made up and are used only to explain the process.

1. XP Sales team says that there are people who will buy a $1,600 detector. 

2. XP Bean counters say to sell a $1,600 machine it must cost XP $500

3. XP Marketing says for people to buy a $1,600 detector it must have X features

4. XP Engineering team has to make a $500 detector with X features. 

That it how it works. XP engineering doesn't have the luxury of putting in an unlimited CPU. In other words they can't spend $495 on a CPU leaving only $5.00 for the rest of the machine. They have to make trade offs.

And you can't let engineers make up their own machine because it'll cost $900,000 by the time they are done. 

This is why a company like Garrett has 10 different detectors. The engineering team had $100 to make an Ace, $300 to make an AT Max, etc. 

My guess is that all of the processing power of the Deus 2 is located in the coil instead of the RC. That is why their coils are so expensive. They shot themselves in the foot with that one. 

I would also say that after using the XP Deus 2 it appears to me that XP does not employ a usability engineer. 

Happy hunting!

1 hour ago, Geezer said:

So reclaimed processing power allows you to see what was previously invisible to the machine in other modes and presumably other machines? Seeing coins on edge better for one thing, does this also allow you to unmask coins near iron? 

Yes. A detector has both limited processing power and limited time to process a signal. The more time or CPU you can give the the detector the better your ending result. Metal detector manufacturers should start posting what their CPUs are like computer manufacturers do. The moral of the story is to only add on what you need -- and everything comes at a cost. 

49 minutes ago, Geezer said:

This concept is most interesting and you have explained it in a way that actually makes it understandable to morons like me. Everyone always said AM went deeper, and this explains why. Thanks for this.

It is the “Complex Ability” part that interests me most. Following this logic, then whether one wished to hunt deep or not, an advantage given by processing power is retained. Would that be correct?

For example, if one really wished to hunt shallow but was mostly concerned with unmasking ability in aluminum and iron trash, would the advantage be lost by the presence of undesired targets using your ticks? If not, then even if it is slower one could look at TID display to evaluate every signal and perhaps increase finds? Or maybe do a better job of evaluating and rejecting trash?

In very heavy trash then, does using the filters makes more sense or would the complex ability allow for unmasking that would make it worth the loss of ground coverage by using time to visually evaluate every signal?

Do these questions even make sense in this context or am I reading too much into what that video says?

Geezer you are correct. The more processing time results in more signal review by the CPU. Now bear in mind that the Deus 2 will not detect a Reale placed over an anvil simply by turning things off. The moral of the story is that everything you turn on may hurt you and you should only turn things on that help you and the bare minimum at that.

2 hours ago, abenson said:

Interesting video. But you give the settings that will work in optimal ground conditions. Which are no trash and no mineralization. Some people will need to use some if these filters to make the Deus 2 work for their sites. Best to adjust settings individually based on site conditions.

In that case you should start with everything off and only add the bare minimum. 

48 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

How mineralized is your soil?  What gain(s) were you running?  A 4" coin not signalling in any default program except beach??

Hi. I made a mistake that beach mode was detecting it. These coins were found because of the added CPU ticks achieved from the above video. I don't think depth was a depth issue, it was rather they were in a difficult position and the Dues 2 needed more ticks to detect them. I repeated this this again and again today by pulling more coins out of the ground. Each time I found a coin in my program I tested the default programs and they did not detect them. Only my program got them, again presumably from the added ticks. 

Hi Everyone. I posted the following video on a response to a different post, but I thought I would post it here for you incase you aren't reading that thread.

This is a video explaining how to go the deepest depth possible with the Deus 2 and also how to increase the Deus 2's ability to process complex signals such as coins on edge. 

Happy swinging!

14 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

You didn't provide enough information on how you set up Park vs. the defaults and it's not clear what you were doing when the Deus "didn't report anything".  How long did you run each program?  Did you really not dig anything, including trash?  Could be a matter of simply not getting your coil over any targets or you already vacuumed up the coins/trash.  Did you dig trash with your modified Park program?  What was the trash to keeper ratio?

Lots of unknowns from the reader's perspective.  I'll just say, I have no fear of the default settings on most of the programs from a performance standpoint.  They are set up pretty well based on cycling through them on known test targets, so I'm at a loss to understand your situation...

 

Hi Chase. Thanks for the response. I figured out what happened. My program is better than the stock programs and did what it was suppose to -- find coins that the Deus II programs can't find, by increasing the CPU ticks available to the RC for processing. More ticks = more more CPU available to process harder signals = more coins. I did not think that I would receive as much CPU ticks as I did. The Deus 2 must waste a lot of CPU ticks on its filters. 

I made a Youtube for anyone wanting to increase the power of their Deus 2 in both depth and ability to process more complex signals.  

I took the Deus 2 out for the first time. I was using my program which was park with everything turned off and the reactivity set to the lowest it would go. I wanted the Deus 2 to dedicate its entire CPU to processing the signal. It found lots of coins at 4”-7” deep with a smashing signal. Before I dug each coin, I went through all of the default programs to see what they sounded like. With the exception of beach mode, the Deus 2 didn’t report anything. Zip. Nada. Any ideas why this could be? Now I’m afraid to hunt with any default programs. 
 

Sam

25 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

Best to use a dime and normalize to a more "common" reactivity setting of between 1.5 to 2.5.  When you use the extremes on the settings other factors come into play that result in unpredictable outcomes.

Hi. I just retested with a clad dime and got the same results. After about 2.5 it starts to drop off with 5 getting no results.

Sam

I did square nails and a clad quarter in the middle. 

In my tests, the Deus can run hotter in EMI. Basically it can be screaming like a pig from EMI but as soon as it detects something its BING BING BING. The Equinox is a cold detector and so has problems. The Deus is a hot detector like the Anfibio. From my experience, the Deus is a configurable multi-frequency Anfibio.

Hi Everyone!

I am using the Deus 2 to perform the Monte nail board test. If I set my reactivity to 0 it detects the coin all ways. If I set my reactivity to 5 it no longer detects the coin any way. I would think it should be the opposite -- setting a faster recovery speed should detect more easily between the nails and the coin. That does not seem to be the case. Any ideas why this would be? It seems with these test results that when in an area with high iron that we should set the Deus 2 to 0 reactivity?

Sam

Hi everyone! Does anyone know how to submit feature requests to XP? 

Thanks,

Sam