Bbs / Fbs / Recovery Speed Questions

[Digalicious]

Thanks Geotech.

Why wasn't there an emphasis on recovery speed at that time? I mean, for typical land hunters in trashy sites, I would think that high recovery and it's superior unmasking / separation, would have been a priority back then, as it is now.

With that said, Chase already asked you the other question I was going to ask you 🙂

[Geotech]

2 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

Carl - Since fast recovery with FBS could be achieved with today's state of the art DSPs, what advantages does Multi-IQ bring to the table vs. FBS that in your opinion motivated ML to move away from that SMF platform starting with Equinox?

I suspect that sequential MF (BBS/FBS) and simultaneous MF (MIQ) end up about equivalent in their raw capabilities. The advantage sequential has is that the analog design is much simpler (no channelization filters needed) but with direct sampling (as with MIQ) all that becomes moot, it's just software. If you were to use direct sampling for FBS then I expect the software timing would become a major headache (it's not continuous), whereas it's simple for MIQ. Therefore, I think the evolution toward direct sampling is why Minelab is now using simultaneous instead of sequential.

1 hour ago, Digalicious said:

Why wasn't there an emphasis on recovery speed at that time? I mean, for typical land hunters in trashy sites, I would think that high recovery and it's superior unmasking / separation, would have beena priority back then, as it is now.

It's just the natural evolution of metal detecting. Better recovery speed would have helped 50 years ago but what mattered back then was depth and ground balance. Today, separation is the Hot Topic so everyone focuses on that. One day it'll be something else. Personally, I'm hoping for foolproof bottle cap rejection.

[strick]

13 hours ago, Geotech said:

It's just the natural evolution of metal detecting. Better recovery speed would have helped 50 years ago but what mattered back then was depth and ground balance. Today, separation is the Hot Topic so everyone focuses on that. One day it'll be something else. Personally, I'm hoping for foolproof bottle cap rejection.

Well you caught my attention with that last sentence. You're talking beer caps right? One of the reasons I like the CTX so much was that I was able to disk out bottle caps and still find the tiniest of foil and gold rings of all sizes. So am I fooling myself in thinking I'm not missing gold rings by disking out bottle caps? The Manticore is doing the same for me...tiny foil no problem and I'm not digging any bottle caps to speak of besides those covered with foil and they are easy to tell as they sound off like a bomb going off with the Manticore. 

strick

[strick]

19 hours ago, Digalicious said:

If a site was pounded with a CTX and/or Etrac, then due to their low recovery speeds, could you not use one of the newer SMF detectors and find a lot more coins due to the superior unmasking performance?

Bingo. 

strick