Steve’s Experimental Axiom Settings

[Steve Herschbach]

Or maybe we should call these “Stupid Steve Tricks” for now.  I’ve only begun delving into these weird settings but figure I may as well toss them out there for other people to experiment with also. I’ll post more somewhere down the line when I come up with something more definitive. But for now, I’ll just give a brief summary.

1. Minimum Sensitivity - I was working a location that was dense with trash, way too many signals. Sensitivity 1 really worked some magic in making it possible to use the machine in dense trash. Way too early to say much on this yet, other than that I did find it useful for cherry picking coins in a park by digging low tones only, which eliminates low conductors in favor of mid to high conductors. I was able to get more coin than trash targets. I still dig trash with a VLF so this was a good resultant in my limited testing. I am going to see what happens on depth on a 1/4 oz nugget going from high to low sensitivity in a future test.
2. Salt Setting - yes it tunes out small gold. But how small? I don’t know yet, but it’s not as bad as people might think. It can also shut up some ground and hot rocks other settings will struggle with. I need more work with both this and Large Mode. My initial sense is that the differences between the modes are more subtle than dramatic.
3. Minimum Threshold - this shows the most promise for developing a silent search “Bogenes Settings” methodology for the Axiom. -7 still has some audio break through. -9 is pretty much dead silent but seems too aggressive? I’ve settled on -8 so far as a preference, and was surprised at how well small nuggets jump out still, and with good depth. It also allows for a bit higher sensitivity setting, so I would highly encourage people to try these very low Threshold settings with either a normal or slightly boosted sensitivity setting. For some situations I’m thinking I might be employing this a lot. Super pleasant way to hunt for those that hate a threshold. I just wish there was more nuance as right now the jump between -7 to -8 to -9 is coarser than I’d like. I put it on my wish list for an update.
4. Forced Frequency Setting - default frequency is 50 with range from 0 - 99. The automatic frequency scan is fairly simple. It scans all frequencies looking for the quietest one. It is therefore imperative normally that you do not introduce extra noise by moving the detector while it scans. Normally I’d have the coil on the ground so it is picking up anything it would pick up in normal sweeping, but aiming the coil at a nearby EMI source like another detector can help eliminate that source, so it bears playing with if it still seems noisy on the first go. If you have an pinpointer, turn it on and set it it 2-3 feet away while doing a frequency scan - this will let most pinpointers play very nicely with the Axiom. And do remember that going to a lower sensitivity or DD coil vs mono also help reduce EMI.
   
   The interesting question here is that for areas with no EMI, is there any difference in the frequencies? There very well might be, though in my limited testing so far I’ve found no smoking gun. But if you want to try, here is the trick. If you want a frequency of 99, start the scan going, then wave a metal item over the coil while the machine scans 0 to about 90, then get the metal away, and let the scan finish. Very good chance you’ll end up at frequency 90 or higher, if not try again. To hit the other extreme, start the scan, and when it gets to about 10, now wave metal over the coil until it gets to 99, then stop and let it finish. You should end up at 10 or lower. With a little practice you can force almost anything, but I think the main interest is in the two extremes. Can anyone find a discernible difference on any target between the extremes? In theory there should be one, but again, my very limited tests so far have not found anything.

So there you go. I do like the fact that the Axiom does not have too many controls, but on the other has enough to give me things to think about and experiment with. Early days still, new machine, people need to experiment and share notes. So that’s mine so far, hopefully a few of you will take up the challenge and add your own observations.

 

[Gazza gold]

Some very interesting tweeks to play with Steve.

I assume the machine does its own "self function test" test when you switch it on but I like the idea of interrupting it's frequency scan at either end of its scale. I'm going to think about your threshold tips...

[microsniper]

On 6/19/2023 at 11:13 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

•  

Quote

• Minimum Sensitivity - I was working a location that was dense with trash, way too many signals. Sensitivity 1 really worked some magic in making it possible to use the machine in dense trash. Way too early to say much on this yet, other than that I did find it useful for cherry picking coins in a park by digging low tones only, which eliminates low conductors in favor of mid to high conductors. I was able to get more coin than trash targets. I still dig trash with a VLF so this was a good resultant in my limited testing. I am going to see what happens on depth on a 1/4 oz nugget going from high to low sensitivity in a future test.
• Salt Setting - yes it tunes out small gold. But how small? I don’t know yet, but it’s not as bad as people might think. It can also shut up some ground and hot rocks other settings will struggle with. I need more work with both this and Large Mode. My initial sense is that the differences between the modes are more subtle than dramatic.
• Minimum Threshold - this shows the most promise for developing a silent search “Bogenes Settings” methodology for the Axiom. -7 still has some audio break through. -9 is pretty much dead silent but seems too aggressive? I’ve settled on -8 so far as a preference, and was surprised at how well small nuggets jump out still, and with good depth. It also allows for a bit higher sensitivity setting, so I would highly encourage people to try these very low Threshold settings with either a normal or slightly boosted sensitivity setting. For some situations I’m thinking I might be employing this a lot. Super pleasant way to hunt for those that hate a threshold. I just wish there was more nuance as right now the jump between -7 to -8 to -9 is coarser than I’d like. I put it on my wish list for an update.

Steve, Im so glad you posted these "Stupid Tricks".    Iv only had the Axiom out about 10 days (maybe 40-50hrs), so im still getting to know it.   Most  locations have been challenging in one way or another.  Either horrible EMI, wet red clay and fields of hot rocks ( or all three at once).    Yesterday  i got out with the intention to play around with settings a bit more and try out a few tricks.  

  

With regards to the minimum threshold: 

  I found this to be an especially helpful and interesting part of the Axiom to explore.   I guess i had not really dug into the nuances up to this point.    One thing that stood out was turning down the threshold below 0 mellowed out the EMI significantly.   What a nice surprise!   I was able to comfortably up the gain a notch as well.    

Turning to the extremes of -9 threshold and full sensitivity and then backing off each incrementally i found a sweet spot for the day.  Sensitivity 5 and threshold +8 (normal timing)   This was great, very little EMI coming through, still picked up birdshot, ground mostly steady.     Usually in this location and im running at 3-4, so great experiment.

 Im used to a steady gpx threshold thats tuned for quiet operation and I have had a difficult time achieving this on the Axiom.    I wish i could  better articulate (Steve maybe you could elaborate) how it is different, but ill just say something else is going on in the way  mode/gain/threshold level effects the whole soundscape.   I worry that Im not hearing the "faint" part of the whisper of a small/deep target like i most certainly do using SDC/GPX .  Taking some getting used to for sure.  

 

Sensitivity 

I have experimented with low sensitivity and yeah, lowering it helps almost the entire spectrum, stability wise, while not loosing too much depth.    Although at a point the tiny ones disappear when switching from fine to normal.   Upping the gain can bring them back but i guess it depends on the ground/EMI of the day.

So far I havent been able to make a faint target stand out that much more by simply turning up the gain.  Yes and no I guess.  Specific setting adjustments for that exact spot /target bring them out a bit more but I cant comfortably keep hunting in those settings.   Seems like I lean towards the lower sensitivity and 3 being most preferable for the average day/conditions so far.

 

Ground Balance

Gold Neck Prospecting made some great observations that could easily be overlooked if not experimented with.   One being the ground balance.   I had the same thought about it feeling like i was using a VLF at times.    

Sometimes Ground balancing a few times or more in the same area around a target is necessary to get a proper balance.      I mean yeah, of course, but its all too easy to balance out/in hot rocks, minerals, and  faint targets.    (and maybe not know it)    Three different balances in the same spot can have dramatically different effects.   I have been able to use this to good effect on ironstones and hot rocks sitting together in clay using Steves recommendations.   However for me its taking some time to adjust my habits to make it work and feel confident.

Im sure a whole thread could be dedicated to making the transition to using the Axiom coming from the Minelab machines.....

Anyway, thanks again Steve for eliciting some  extra curiosity, it was a fruitful day of experimentation.

 

 

 

      The big one (18.45g) I hit in the last 15 mins of daylight on the longest day of the year.   It was in the middle of a strewn field of large bullets.   I had been over the  exact area twice before.  Two people, me included,  probably waved a coil over it and passed it up...  It was a screamer/overload  and only 2" deep.   sounded just like all the other bullets i was tired of digging near the surface (hi-low btw).   But since it was my last target of the day and only about 10ft from a previous  good find i figured id just go ahead and get that piece of trash out of the way, unbelievable..  

 

   

 

[Steve Herschbach]

5 hours ago, microsniper said:

Im used to a steady gpx threshold thats tuned for quiet operation and I have had a difficult time achieving this on the Axiom.    I wish i could  better articulate (Steve maybe you could elaborate) how it is different,

Minelab employed a lot of filtering to get the old GPX series threshold rock solid steady. It’s telling that they went away from that with the GPZ 7000 and GPX 6000. Some of what you are experiencing as EMI is no doubt just the fact that ever since the GPX 5000 every prospecting PI made since has had a less stable threshold.

As far as I am concerned the GPX 5000 and older machines are great detectors. They may be the better option for some people. Some old GPX users will find the Axiom to not be to their liking because it is different. Others will be happy they switched. I’m not trying to push the needle either way. Truth is people will just have to sort it out for themselves on their own ground, but as this thread highlights it might take a little time and experimentation to find out what works best.

[Евгений]

Hi everyone. Say Steve, you worked with both 5000 and Axiom, which device do you think is better? Sorry, maybe Google translated something wrong.

[Steve Herschbach]

3 hours ago, Евгений said:

Hi everyone. Say Steve, you worked with both 5000 and Axiom, which device do you think is better? Sorry, maybe Google translated something wrong.

I pretty much answer that question at another thread. Long story short neither is “better” overall. Which might be best depends on the individual involved and what they are trying to do. That fact I have an Axiom and not a GPX 5000 already says what works best for me. Others may decide differently.

 

[timbus59]

On 6/19/2023 at 11:13 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

 

1. Minimum Threshold - this shows the most promise for developing a silent search “Bogenes Settings” methodology for the Axiom. -7 still has some audio break through. -9 is pretty much dead silent but seems too aggressive? I’ve settled on -8 so far as a preference, and was surprised at how well small nuggets jump out still, and with good depth. It also allows for a bit higher sensitivity setting, so I would highly encourage people to try these very low Threshold settings with either a normal or slightly boosted sensitivity setting. For some situations I’m thinking I might be employing this a lot. Super pleasant way to hunt for those that hate a threshold. I just wish there was more nuance as right now the jump between -7 to -8 to -9 is coarser than I’d like. I put it on my wish list for an update.

A good showing for Steve's Bogenes Settings (Minimum Threshold)

The other day I had a couple hours to kill and went to a 20 foot X 20 foot nugget patch that a fellow detectorist friend had shown me. We'd already pounded this small area pretty heavily with his Gold Monster and my Axiom thinking that nothing was left. I decided to try Bogenes Settings (Threshold -8, Sensitivity 5, mono coil, GB 50-26). The machine ran dead quiet until the first light signal broke through. I was able to pick up two pieces (.22 & .29 grams) at 5-6 inches in mineralized conglomerate in about ten minutes when with other noisier settings with threshold, I had not picked up these bits. The conglomerate was so hard I had to beat on it with my pick for about 5-10 minutes for each recovery. (note: FWIW - I usually have the machine set to slow speed, but had forgotten to set that so it was at normal speed - go figure).  

Anyway I'm sold on Bogenes Settings. What a quieter, pleasant way to hunt as well.

Thanks Steve.

[338Edgeshooter]

I have also been experimenting with the minimum threshold trick which I stumbled onto with my Axiom, I usually am in normal mode -7 threshold on sensitivity 4 with 11x7 DD at a place near me that has terrible emi. This place is the worst of all worlds for a metal detector, it is an old hand placer near power lines and houses and a busy 2 lane hwy that has lots of hot rocks, magnetite and iron rich soil. The 11” mono will not ground balance there which is why I got the smaller dd coil. It is 5 minutes from my house and I really wanted to detect it just because of how close to home it is. So I go there with the new dd hoping for a huge change and except for the dd actually ground balancing there was still plenty of noise and I was disappointed again.  Out of despiration after like 10 frquency scans ground balances, factory resets and headscratching with no noticeable change I started adjusting different settings one at a time from min to max just trying to quiet my Axiom. Changing modes did not help much and I had to run sensitivity down to 1-2 with the 11x7 dd coil just to to tame the emi down to a slightly chatty level.  then I adjusted the threshold all the way down and it got quiet! I upped the sensitivity to 4 & 5 and back to normal mode, it was still quiet! Then I bumped the threshold up untill it started breaking through at -6/-7 and settled on -7 which is almost silent at this spot. I am far from a PI detecting expert and wasnt sure this was a good idea so I started sweeping over a couple of lead test targets while going back and fourth from a setting of mode normal/ sensitivity 2/threshold 0 to the silent sensitivity 4/ threshold-7  and at maybey 2” and could hear them much better without the noisy emi/threshold. Then I poked them in the full depth of my index finger, filled with dirt re ground balance and they were still loud and clear! My testers are small #6 & #4 lead shot inside 1 layer of electrical tape for easy recovery. So then I log onto DP this morning to ask if this will work or if im missing something and I spotted this thread which makes me feel even better about this method! Now if I can get through all the rusty flakes and nails I might find some gold there someday! Lol. As said above the “Bogenes setting” makes for a “very pleasant way to hunt”