This Is A Post From Geotech About The AQ On Thomas Dankowski's Forum

[tvr]

On 1/12/2022 at 1:11 PM, cudamark said:

As bad as the design of the AQ limited is, with very limited battery life, I could live with all that if it had some reliable discrimination that was touted from the beginning. Sadly, it's just a slightly overpriced, poorly designed, and temperamental  dig everything PI machine.

So here are some of my thoughts on what "useful discrimination" is related to the AQ LTD:

Back when I got a CZ20 to start getting serious about finding gold at beaches, it was tuned so that nickels were mid-tone. I could choose to detect and dig only the mid-tones with the theory that doing so could maximize return on effort at the beach by only digging the range where most of the gold was. Thinking back on that recently, I was inspired learn what I could with the AQ LTD with respect to useful discrimination.

I've been hunting nearly all in all metal mode with the AQ LTD. Shortly after I got the AQ LTD I took a trip to one beach specifically to see how the AQ handled a beach filled with hot rocks and learn a little bit on how I could handle them using its discrimination capabilities. I had not done much with discrimination since then until the last two weeks. Had a long trip to a wide open beach and I figured it was time to really learn the discrimination capabilities. One thing I previously figured out is that it is difficult to get rid of hair pins on any setting; I still found that to be true, yet they do give that classic double beep that makes them easy to walk away from. I decided to pick a couple of targets and set up to hear the tone shift in tone mode that would tell me to walk away from those targets that otherwise do not give a lot of clues.

The problem targets I picked to set up with were some small screws that I had dug while thinking they were going to be good targets, but were not. Setting up to identify those screws as "no dig" in tone mode had me at Reject = 7; ATS just shy of 9. I spent a few days tweaking the settings but staying pretty close to those; ending up with Reject 7 and ATS just a hair above 8. If I chose to just dig the sweet high tones and none of the warbles or grunting sounds then about the only iron I was digging was the occasional hair pin and a couple of round washers. The hairpins were still walk-away signals because of the clear double beep. I was not digging tent stakes. I also wasn't digging pennies, dimes, quarters, lead sinkers or soda beer cans! I dug most targets for nearly a week to see what the audio was like. With those settings, zinc pennies, small fishing sinkers and most of the tent pegs were a warbling mid-tone, copper pennies, big sinkers, dimes, quarters, soda and beer cans and the rest of the tent pegs were low tone grunting. The biggest problem target remained bottle caps. I’m not doing well identifying them for what they are.

After the last couple weeks I think I'm pretty confident that the AQ LTD does have useful discrimination and that if I want to just focus on the most likely gold range and not dig coins, cans, sinkers, tent pegs or .50 caliber shells; I can do that. There is a chance I will not dig that huge monstrous gold ring when set like I'm set, but the focus will be squarely on looking for the majority of gold jewelry and not digging otherwise. In the middle of fresh drop season, I think it could be a productive way to go!

[CCadrin]

48 minutes ago, tvr said:

So here are some of my thoughts on what "useful discrimination" is related to the AQ LTD:

Back when I got a CZ20 to start getting serious about finding gold at beaches, it was tuned so that nickels were mid-tone. I could choose to detect and dig only the mid-tones with the theory that doing so could maximize return on effort at the beach by only digging the range where most of the gold was. Thinking back on that recently, I was inspired learn what I could with the AQ LTD with respect to useful discrimination.

 

I've been hunting nearly all in all metal mode with the AQ LTD. Shortly after I got the AQ LTD I took a trip to one beach specifically to see how the AQ handled a beach filled with hot rocks and learn a little bit on how I could handle them using its discrimination capabilities. I had not done much with discrimination since then until the last two weeks. Had a long trip to a wide open beach and I figured it was time to really learn the discrimination capabilities. One thing I previously figured out is that it is difficult to get rid of hair pins on any setting; I still found that to be true, yet they do give that classic double beep that makes them easy to walk away from. I decided to pick a couple of targets and set up to hear the tone shift in tone mode that would tell me to walk away from those targets that otherwise do not give a lot of clues.

 

The problem targets I picked to set up with were some small screws that I had dug while thinking they were going to be good targets, but were not. Setting up to identify those screws as "no dig" in tone mode had me at Reject = 7; ATS just shy of 9. I spent a few days tweaking the settings but staying pretty close to those; ending up with Reject 7 and ATS just a hair above 8. If I chose to just dig the sweet high tones and none of the warbles or grunting sounds then about the only iron I was digging was the occasional hair pin and a couple of round washers. The hairpins were still walk-away signals because of the clear double beep. I was not digging tent stakes. I also wasn't digging pennies, dimes, quarters, lead sinkers or soda beer cans! I dug most targets for nearly a week to see what the audio was like. With those settings, zinc pennies, small fishing sinkers and most of the tent pegs were a warbling mid-tone, copper pennies, big sinkers, dimes, quarters, soda and beer cans and the rest of the tent pegs were low tone grunting. The biggest problem target remained bottle caps. I’m not doing well identifying them for what they are.

 

After the last couple weeks I think I'm pretty confident that the AQ LTD does have useful discrimination and that if I want to just focus on the most likely gold range and not dig coins, cans, sinkers, tent pegs or .50 caliber shells; I can do that. There is a chance I will not dig that huge monstrous gold ring when set like I'm set, but the focus will be squarely on looking for the majority of gold jewelry and not digging otherwise. In the middle of fresh drop season, I think it could be a productive way to go!

 

I have also experimented with it and do use it based upon how deep I want to dig. My findings are just like what you posted.

[Steve Herschbach]

As far as I know there really was not any serious prototype vetting before this so-called pay to play cooperative vetting program was cooked up. Basically just Alexandre and his one chosen tester, who was a wader, not a diver. And who did not use the disc functions in favor of good old fashioned hunting by ear. That should have told everyone all they needed to know about the discrimination right there.

Maybe a couple spins by Tom Walsh and Rick or others, who honestly are not cutting edge users. Quite insufficient obviously, but characterizing it as shilling for free detectors is unfair I think. No, they did better than that. They got people to pay $1500 to be testers.

In my experience even when companies use excellent testers, the feedback they give is often ignored, because the non-detecting engineers and marketing people simply know better than people with decades of experience. Nobody wants to hear the baby is ugly, and the vast majority of major decisions are made internally before anyone outside gets a peek. Then people have to defend the early decisions, and admitting they were wrong….. it’s just not human nature. I mean come one, we were told the big cheese Tom Walsh himself vetted and signed off on 100 sets of AQ hardware. Use them for a proper secret prototyping program (eating the cost), sell them, or trash them? We know what the decision was, and I’d argue it was the wrong one.

If just one person like Joe was taken in at the start, and actually listened to, so much of this could have been avoided. It all reeks of the blind leading the blind.

As far as discrimination, the claims made were, and still are, totally overblown, as I pointed out since day one. That said, in proper context I can discriminate about as well or better with this machine as any PI I have used, using standard audio tells. And the added presets extend that. So for me personally given what I know about the tech, and what my expectations were, I’m fine with the level of discrimination I can achieve with the machine. There is some genuine innovation here. Almost any VLF first time PI user would, however, feel like they got sold a bill of goods, based on the marketing statements. It’s a refinement at best, not revolutionary.

There is a real gem in the rough lurking here, and that’s a fact. I still hope and pray the right gem cutter will reveal what I know to be true. I have an inherent sense for detectors, I can feel the power lurking. There is power here, and the potential for the best beach PI ever. I don’t BS anyone, ever. I simply don’t think or operate that way, never have, never will. I have no doubts the capability exists and is real. My only doubts are on FTs ability these days to execute on delivering on anything but excellent single frequency detectors.

I swore a few posts back I’d stay out of this going forward, not doing very well at that so far, but it needs to be said. Maybe some egos might get set aside long enough to listen. If it even reaches the right ears at all. Seems those ears don’t care to tune in though. Uncomfortable truths, or at least perceptions, might have to be faced up to, so much easier to watch the other channel. But I always give people the benefit of the doubt and then some… hope springs eternal in my world. 

[The_Stalker]

Thank you Steve.  Well said.  The market needs a water proof ground balance PI for the beach hunters.  It would be so much better if an American company would be the one to finally offer this product.  I really feel that these companies underestimate what a functioning machine like this could sell for.  If people are willing to pay $6000 for a machine that will find .5 gram gold nuggets, what would people pay for a machine that can consistantly find 9 gram 14k gold rings on a beach.  American rewards those who finish the job and punishes those who quit.  Finish the AQ First Texas! 

[Steve Herschbach]

4 minutes ago, The_Stalker said:

Thank you Steve.  Well said.  The market needs a water proof ground balance PI for the beach hunters.  It would be so much better if an American company would be the one to finally offer this product.  I really feel that these companies underestimate what a functioning machine like this could sell for.  If people are willing to pay $6000 for a machine that will find .5 gram gold nuggets, what would people pay for a machine that can consistantly find 9 gram 14k gold rings on a beach.  American rewards those who finish the job and punishes those who quit.  Finish the AQ First Texas! 

American companies have always underestimated what the gold market can bear for retail pricing, and as a result have feared investing too deep in both development, and highest quality (expensive) parts.

People have no problem paying insane amounts of money for gold detectors, when single finds can still pay for those detectors, and then some. But you have to deliver the actual performance also, as prospectors are a very unforgiving bunch. Serious beach and relic hunters also have no problem spending some large sums if it gives them a real performance edge.

It’s simple. VLF taps out eventually on the very best sites, and you either go high power PI, or you go home. I will always argue for VLF first. To quote myself “use a VLF when you can, a PI when you have to.” But VLF will always play out, and so you see people shift to PI, as long as the items being searched for have a high enough perceived potential for value. An ideal non-prospecting example is relic hunting at Culpeper, VA. It was almost entirely VLF early on, and is almost entirely ground balancing PI now.

[mh9162013]

8 hours ago, cudamark said:

If you piss off your customer base, those responsible will get fired, or the company goes bankrupt.

Not sure what your experience is working for a company, but people (especially managers) don't always act in their employer's best interest. And employees (regardless of where they are in the hierarchy) often don't get what they deserve for the good things they do, as well as the bad.

 

[cobill]

Latest post on Fisher Labs Impulse AQ FB page from Alexandre Tartar:

The IMPULSE AQ units are part of a limited series of 100 pieces.

This series allowed us not to rush off into a worldwide series and to see what could be improved.

We can see that there are a lot of problems with our competitors with waterproof devices. Unfortunately there are many detectors on the market and the number of returns is catastrophic.

Here we have modified the mechanics, removed the cables.

We have upgraded the electronic board so that it can be mass produced avec a good board adjustement. We have improved the electromagnetic shielding of the detector and improved its behavior in seawater.

Regarding "discrimination", there has been no change. It's always an iron reject setting.

So, I spent $1,800+ to be a tester, so "they could see what could be improved" Are you kidding me!

Bill

[schoolofhardNox]

2 minutes ago, cobill said:

Latest post on Fisher Labs Impulse AQ FB page from Alexandre Tartar:

The IMPULSE AQ units are part of a limited series of 100 pieces.

This series allowed us not to rush off into a worldwide series and to see what could be improved.

We can see that there are a lot of problems with our competitors with waterproof devices. Unfortunately there are many detectors on the market and the number of returns is catastrophic.

Here we have modified the mechanics, removed the cables.

We have upgraded the electronic board so that it can be mass produced avec a good board adjustement. We have improved the electromagnetic shielding of the detector and improved its behavior in seawater.

Regarding "discrimination", there has been no change. It's always an iron reject setting.

So, I spent $1,800+ to be a tester, so "they could see what could be improved" Are you kidding me!

Bill

Apparently .... yes 😭 You and me and a bunch of others. Sad really. The least they could do is allow us a trade in for the final version.

[tvr]

15 minutes ago, cobill said:

So, I spent $1,800+ to be a tester, so "they could see what could be improved" Are you kidding me!

Did you read the disclosure statement for the LTD? It is at the bottom of the following post and acknowledging understanding of it was part of getting on the early buyer's list.

 

[cobill]

TVR, 

Yes I read and acknowledged the Fisher Disclosure letter. My issue is that Fisher States in their letter that:

"Experienced beach hunters have rigorously tested the Impulse in multiple beach environments since 2009. The Impulse AQ Limited is engineered, manufactured and tested to be fully compliant with the demanding requirements of this application and environment. The Impulse AQ is not a prototype or pre-production metal detector".

 I'll say it again:

50 minutes ago, cobill said:

So, I spent $1,800+ to be a tester, so "they could see what could be improved" Are you kidding me!

Bill