Jump to content

Will The Next Gen Detectors Address Emi ???


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, jasong said:

It's because coils are antennas too, meaning they can couple with both magnetic and electric fields. Generally, with loop antennas for receiving any signal, the rule of thumb is that bigger diameter = more sensitivity. It's more complicated than that since certain sizes/shapes are more sensitive to certain frequencies, 1/2 frequencies, 1/4 frequencies, etc, but that's a basic idea anyways.

 

Thanks for that Jasong.

That's what I meant by questioning if the effect was simply due to the smaller / tighter field, or something else in addition to that (like the coil shape as you mentioned).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


17 minutes ago, Jeff McClendon said:

I am not seeing anything wrong with Simon's videos by the way. They do show a  noticeable reduction in audible and visible EMI.

Thanks Jeff, as you know the video was filmed to show the Vanquish was operating at a higher gain more stable than the Nox in that particular EMI environment and I was wondering at the time if it was due to it's elliptical coils.  The video clearly shows the noise cancel at the point I started the video working as the EMI is crazy with ID numbers going wild, the noise cancel completes and that stops, no more false ID numbers, just slight EMI blips, I then move on testing other modes to try find one as stable as the Vanquish.  It was filmed 3 years ago or something and the intended purpose was not to suit Digalicious's argument that noise cancel does not work or I would have focused more on proving it does work in the video, but a side effect of that video was it shows for a short time that noise cancel did indeed stop the Target ID falsing.

If I wanted to prove it does work I could go and film it now, but I know it does so there is little point, I'm not wasting my time doing that video for someone that is intent on believing it doesn't' work.

Noise cancel works fantastic on detectors like the GPZ and even older 4500 too.  The Manticore noise cancel appears to work very well.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, jasong said:

 

I think the whole concept of a "noise cancel" button is obsolete though. Modern computing power is in abundance for cheap on chips today. No reason EMI filtering/noise cancelling/channel scanning can't go on in the background 24/7 and auto adjust as needed rather than press a button. IMO anyways.

The cheap power chips haven't just been in abundance "today". They've been around for a good couple of decades. Yet, the engineers haven't incorporated real time EMI filtering. I think they haven't done so because it wouldn't make any difference. More specifically, in high EMI, all the channels are affected about equally, because the frequency is so close in each channel. Put another way, if the EMI is filtered out, there would be a heck of a lot of good targets that would also be filtered out. One example of that, is how F350 posted about the Silver Slayer program eliminating EMI. It eliminated EMI because that program notches out everything below copper / silver, and since most EMI IDs below copper / silver, the EMI noise was notched out and silenced. That works great if a hunter is cherry picking for the highest conductors, but not so great for everything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, phrunt said:

 

If I wanted to prove it does work I could go and film it now, but I know it does so there is little point, I'm not wasting my time doing that video for someone that is intent on believing it doesn't' work.

Noise cancel works fantastic on detectors like the GPZ and even older 4500 too.  The Manticore noise cancel appears to work very well.

My point is NOT that it doesn't work. My point is that IF it does work, it's going to come at a significant performance hit in other aspects. I made that quite clear numerous times throughout this discussion, yet I'm still be misquoted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Digalicious said:

On both my Vanquish 540 and my Legend, noise cancel does basically nothing. I've also watched countless detecting videos, and it didn't matter if they were using the 540, 800, Legend, or D2, because not once in any of those videos did the noise cancel do anything either.

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, as has been noted with the Deus 2 Silver slayer program I do a similar thing on my Ace 300i, it's 10kHz can be a troublesome frequency for EMI in some spots and as all I want to find are silver coins I just notch out everything below the last couple of notches where the silver coins reside, it's been a successful approach and makes a detector that otherwise wouldn't find these coins by lowering sensitivity be able to find them.    It has a frequency shift option but the shift isn't large enough to move itself off the EMI frequency.

It's default coin mode removes a lot of the notches that the EMI falls into by default, but by just keeping the last two notches it virtually eliminates all EMI falsing and I don't feel performance is hindered, I still pull 10+ inch silver coins and our NZ $1 and $2 coins so I can buy lunch or dinner on the way home from the hunt with coins I found ?

03-ace-300i-gallery2000x1000-2.thumb.jpg.679c7099d47bd221aa7b123779b10f6f.jpg

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Digalicious said:

In other words, you have nothing to counter my points (either theoretically or empirically), so as usual, you resort to veiled insults and Red Herring arguments. It's rather childish and pathetic.

Nice projecting Digalicious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, phrunt said:

Anyway, as has been noted with the Deus 2 Silver slayer program I do a similar thing on my Ace 300i, it's 10kHz can be a troublesome frequency for EMI in some spots and as all I want to find are silver coins I just notch out everything below the last couple of notches where the silver coins reside, it's been a successful approach and makes a detector that otherwise wouldn't find these coins by lowering sensitivity be able to find them.    It has a frequency shift option but the shift isn't large enough to move itself off the EMI frequency.

 

Exactly.

One way or another, if EMI noise reduction has to work via software, then that means filtering of some form. Which also means the "give and take" we often talk about, will come into full effect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...