Issue With Axiom And Ground Noise

[Gone Bush]

15 minutes ago, peterinaust said:

Can I ask a question on the Axiom ground balance, shows two numbers on the screen. Why two numbers? what do they represent?

Cheers

Hi Peter,

Absolutely no idea.
Im sure they mean something and maybe Garrett themselves would be best to answer that question.
All I use them for is a comparison between locations.
If it’s unfamiliar ground, when I first turn on and ground balance it gives me an idea of what to expect.
Say its 45/20 I know mono coil will be fine but if it’s 60/30 then I need to pay attention because a DD might be needed.
Having said that, I will do almost anything to avoid taking a mono coil off and going to a DD.
Only once have I used the DD on 6000 for any more than curiosity and that was on the lease down by the creek.
Every other location the 6000 was usable maxed out with mono, admittedly sometimes with a very slow sweep and travel speed but it worked and found gold none the less.

Been thinking about the ways the two machines are different and perhaps the amount of concentration required is another thing I have noticed.
Being able to max out 6000 and then run it in really difficult locations requires constant concentration to pick out those very weak dips/rises in the threshold that indicate a very small or deep target.
Cant yet comment on the deep target sounds for Axiom but small targets do seem to require less focus to hear.
Dont know that Axiom processes the audio response in a dramatically better way than 6000 but It seems the threshold sits at a lower level so I think this makes the target response seem to be better than 6000 when in reality it could quite possibly be no different.
Once I get back to the bush and onto some patches I will keep everyone informed on results or lack thereof 🤣🤪 

 

[peterinaust]

Thanks for the reply GB, maybe Steve can answer the question on the numbers, have been going to ask the question for a while. Thanks again for putting up all the testing you have done, I for one have learnt a lot from it.

Cheers and good luck to you.

[jasong]

Did you test your little test nugget when you revisted that same place? I didn't see it in the vid but I was kinda scrolling through.

In your video I noticed your coil is still going off when you touch the ground, like in the last video. Also, your detector is still hitting little variable pockets of mineralization as you detect in the new vids, but in the last vid (the one where the nugget wasn't detectable) you had it dialed down enough to eliminate the soil variability - that's when you lost the ability to hear the test nugget. 

I'm trying to make an effort here to understand what is different and what was wrong with the last machine now that you have a new machine to compare it to.

In the last one, you balanced to the bad mineralization pockets (that gave you 60-ish on the X reading). This one you seemed to balance to the average soil background (45 on the X). Does nowhere in that wash balance to 55-60 anymore? As in - the indication of a faulty Axiom is over compensating on the balance? Or does it still manual balance to the 60 if you try to eliminate the hot pockets?

Reason I'm asking is because the last use case over existing equipment that I (and a few others who I know and/or detect with) still have for the Axiom is exactly this: highly variable washes in AZ where the 6 and 7 have to be dialed down so far to work that they are more or less useless. So I'm curious to really understand how the Axiom is performing here.

*Edit - no need for XRF to test for salts. Just taste the dirt. 😁 Well anyways, that's what I do (I have no clue if your soil has bad elements in it though, so I guess I better not recommend this for others), but soil with enough salt to wreak havoc on a detector almost always has enough salt to taste if it's akalis. I'm assuming the two numbers on the GB scale are X and C, C should indicate salt content too? Not sure of that though, might be in the manual?

[Steve Herschbach]

Axiom has a dual channel ground balance and each number represents one of the two channels. Read the link below. Long story short Garrett’s version of MPS, started with Infinium, improved in ATX, now finally getting serious with Axiom. Better late than never I guess.

https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/559-interview-with-brent-weaver-senior-design-engineer-garrett-metal-detectors/

[peterinaust]

Thanks Steve.

[jasong]

Aha, good to know what that ground balance means, thanks for that Steve.

[Steve Herschbach]

The Axiom ground balance range is the widest I have ever experienced. You can literally ground balance out specific targets like a coin or a nail, and with the Garrett Ground Balance Window, do it with more than one target sample at a time. It's not perfect by any means but can be amazing in some locations.

Regarding the most recent video with his new unit at the difficult creek, based on the varying bands and pockets of concentrated mineralization, this would likely be a good application for the Ground Balance Window. Even though it appears the Axiom is already handling this difficult ground rather well, utilizing the Ground Balance Window will likely further improve its stability. I'm obviously assuming it was not applied in this case, and if I am wrong in that assumption, my apologies.

But if not, find a spot that contains the both the prominent ground and a hot pocket, remain in ground balance beyond 10 seconds, and then after the 10 second beep continue pumping and scanning over both types of ground until they’re both substantially eliminated by the GB Window.

I always want to include the caveat that aggressive ground balancing is not a free lunch. Ground and targets overlap to a near infinite degree, and applying too much ground balance can result in missed targets. The key is to apply only just as much as is needed, and no more.

Remember also that once you have done this, engaging the ground balance again clears the system and you start over. So if you have it set just right, don't hit the manual ground balance button again! If you do, hold again for 10 seconds to start over. This is not a bad thing per se. Sometimes I just felt like I needed to clear it and start again when moving around.

Note that this is a distinct benefit of the manual ground balance, this ability to tune up and lock in, that you can't do with tracking. Tracking is always letting the machine do it's thing, and while it has applications also, with Axiom I far prefer manual and knowing it is just where I put it, and nothing else.
 

[Gone Bush]

Ok, lots of questions there.
My technical understanding is limited so forgive me if answers are basic.

Didn’t test with the Nugget.
Replacement unit was so much smoother and better behaved I didn’t think to test. Had it in my pocket too.
Running so well on 6 and higher I guess I just assumed it would hit the 0.11 no problem.
Back in the creek with extremely variable ground, with the replacement unit, there was no time that I got a ground balance upper number above I think 53.
First Axiom was jumping from 50’s up to early 60’s in same location within a few inches regardless of where that was.
Having said that, I generally ground balance on a quieter area and just listen to and ignore the hot areas like the oblong patch of mineralisation in the video.
This was undoubtedly, based on my experience in that location, a pocket of highly reactive iron beads that plague that creek bed.
Ive never really trusted balancing out variable ground noise. Hot rocks, in some locations, yes but pockets of ground noise, no.
Prefer to hear the noise and determine for myself if it’s the ground or something that warrants further investigation.
This can be difficult with 6000 but Axiom conveys the ground response a bit differently and I find it easier to determine what I am hearing.
Some of those pockets have a viable target in them and I found with 6000 if I ground balance over the pocket I don’t hear the target signals.
Perhaps with more use I will learn to trust the Axiom more and maybe try balancing out those hot areas, (it is certainly the first detector I have owned that I would consider doing this with), however I really like to hear everything the ground is telling me.
Unfortunately this means for most people listening to my machine, it sounds like an unintelligible mess. That’s how I like it.

Every detector I have used in that creek sounds off when the coil touches the ground over a hot pocket.
My issue with the first unit was that it sounded off no matter where I touched the ground in any location.
The replacement behaves what I consider normally, no (or very minor) response on normal ground and a response, sometimes dramatic, on the hot ground/pockets.
Some of the iron bead pockets have had water wash the sands off to the point they are almost exposed and therefore very reactive and very noisy.
All of the above is not helped by my running every detector on the redline.

Taste the ground? My luck it would be a dingoes toilet.

Manual? What’s that?

Steve, you are correct, manual ground balance and no balance window. That’s also how I like it.
Last years total and the sheer volume of nuggets less than 0.20 grams has me (possibly overly) paranoid that to much fiddling with ground balance, in its varying available forms on Axiom, and until I have more time with it, may well cost me weight.
Pretty used to a noisy/variable (within limits) threshold now.
Axioms threshold, how I run it, is certainly better suited to my detecting style than 6000.
Undoubtably one of the reasons I like it so much.

I will head back out to the creek and try a few different things, including burying my test nugget, and post another video.
Please forgive my poor quality videos. 
 

[Steve Herschbach]

1 hour ago, Gone Bush said:

Ive never really trusted balancing out variable ground noise. Hot rocks, in some locations, yes but pockets of ground noise, no.
Prefer to hear the noise and determine for myself if it’s the ground or something that warrants further investigation.

 

I totally and 100% agree with you!

 

On 1/5/2023 at 11:45 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

I always want to include the caveat that aggressive ground balancing is not a free lunch. Ground and targets overlap to a near infinite degree, and applying too much ground balance can result in missed targets. The key is to apply only just as much as is needed, and no more.

I meant that in the quite literal sense of you should not apply any more ground balancing than you personally feel forced to apply. I get real uncomfortable if a machine is too quiet, so I will do just like you and dig hot spots and hot rocks, as long as the effort in doing so does not reach a certain level of oppressiveness that means inefficiency at work. So absolutely not, do not engage any more ground balance than you yourself feel is warranted for the conditions and your comfort level. But the option is there for when it is needed. That's what I want - options, and me deciding when to apply those options. 

[goldenoldie]

1 hour ago, Gone Bush said:

I will head back out to the creek and try a few different things, including burying my test nugget, and post another video.
Please forgive my poor quality videos. 
 

Great feedback GB in regard to the Axiom.

Also, since have mentioned the 6000 in your review of the Axiom, then when you said you detect with the 6000 up at max sensitivity, so is that up at the max Manual setting or Auto+ setting with a threshold as well?

And as you are to head back to the creek it would be good to video the 6000 in operation at the same location also?