Cure For Falsing Hunting In High Mineralization, Iron, And Modern Trash?

[midalake]

On 8/5/2023 at 12:28 PM, CPT_GhostLight said:

states that the Audio Reponse is an audio amplifier which makes tiny and deep target easier to hear so it shouldn't affect the depth the detector is hitting,

23 hours ago, TJ Jeepguy said:

AR doesn’t technically reduce the depth of  the detector,

I have been thinking about all of the testing I have done. It makes me lean to running your Audio Response high 6-7 and controlling the detector with sensitivity.  Even in my black sand conditions I find Audio response is not the lone culprit when looking at stability.  Depth was affected by both sensitivity and Audio Response. 

It would be nice to see a good test garden example of a lower audio response beating a high audio response in ANY condition.

[CPT_GhostLight]

3 hours ago, midalake said:

I have been thinking about all of the testing I have done. It makes me lean to running your Audio Response high 6-7 and controlling the detector with sensitivity.  Even in my black sand conditions I find Audio response is not the lone culprit when looking at stability.  Depth was affected by both sensitivity and Audio Response. 

It would be nice to see a good test garden example of a lower audio response beating a high audio response in ANY condition.

I did a little experimenting yesterday on a hunt looking for deep coins. Running Fast with Full Tones, Offset 5, Silencer & B.Caps at 0, and Reactivity at 1.5,  I came across a nickel signal (which did end up being a nickel) that had a stable 62 TID about 5 inches down in a park with iron and modern trash polution. I was running my sensitivity from 95 to 96 and started out with Audio Response at 5 but reduced it to 4 because there was way too much falsing on iron and tiny bits of trash. I hit the nickel signal nice and clear with AR at 4, but before I dug, I decided to see how low I could go with AR and still hit the signal. I reduce AR one step at a time. AR at 3 also hit the nickel loud and clear with 62 TID. AR at 2 still showed 62 ID but was fainter on the target signal. AR at 1 also showed 62 but the nickel sound was barely audible. AR at 0 also still showed the 62 ID but I couldn't hear the target audio at all. If it wasn't for the stable 62 ID, I wouldn't have known the nickel was there in AR 0 or 1, and 2 would have been a very iffy sound at best.

This was just one quick test in one scenario and more testing needs to be done, but I agree that AR is most probably an audio amplified and won't affect detecting depth other than your ability to hear deep signals. Of couse everyone has different hearing so it's a season to taste type of thing, but AR level combined with sensitivity, tone types, reactivity, silencer, and audio volume, can give you quite a bit of power to control falsing and EMI mitigation. 

[midalake]

9 hours ago, CPT_GhostLight said:

I was running my sensitivity from 95 to 96 and started out with Audio Response at 5 but reduced it to 4 because there was way too much falsing on iron and tiny bits of trash.

Therein lies the possibilities. All of my testing tells me you will not miss deep targets when running sensitivity in 90 as compared to 96. In fact, on fringe testing, it was not until the D2 had a sensitivity of 88 did I lose depth capability. 
We ran that test Mutiple times with different targets in different locations. 

[F350Platinum]

I generally run AR at 3 on my beach program. It still makes a bit of noise with varied minerals like iron and black sand, but it's acceptable.

[Rattlehead]

When coin shooting in heavy iron, I like to use Fast based programs because they seem to run a lot smoother and false less. The higher weighted frequency programs obviously won't hit high conductors as hard as programs running lower frequencies. So, I run a slightly higher Audio Response of 4 or 5 to help alert me a little better. Once I get the Audio Response dialed in, I rarely change it. If I'm getting too much falsing or EMI, I just lower the sensitivity a little. Of course, I don't swing anywhere near as fast as that guy when hunting in iron, so that helps too. To each his own.

[ecoast]

On 8/7/2023 at 12:23 PM, CPT_GhostLight said:

I did a little experimenting yesterday on a hunt looking for deep coins. Running Fast with Full Tones, Offset 5, Silencer & B.Caps at 0, and Reactivity at 1.5,  I came across a nickel signal (which did end up being a nickel) that had a stable 62 TID about 5 inches down in a park with iron and modern trash polution. I was running my sensitivity from 95 to 96 and started out with Audio Response at 5 but reduced it to 4 because there was way too much falsing on iron and tiny bits of trash. I hit the nickel signal nice and clear with AR at 4, but before I dug, I decided to see how low I could go with AR and still hit the signal. I reduce AR one step at a time. AR at 3 also hit the nickel loud and clear with 62 TID. AR at 2 still showed 62 ID but was fainter on the target signal. AR at 1 also showed 62 but the nickel sound was barely audible. AR at 0 also still showed the 62 ID but I couldn't hear the target audio at all. If it wasn't for the stable 62 ID, I wouldn't have known the nickel was there in AR 0 or 1, and 2 would have been a very iffy sound at best.

This was just one quick test in one scenario and more testing needs to be done, but I agree that AR is most probably an audio amplified and won't affect detecting depth other than your ability to hear deep signals. Of couse everyone has different hearing so it's a season to taste type of thing, but AR level combined with sensitivity, tone types, reactivity, silencer, and audio volume, can give you quite a bit of power to control falsing and EMI mitigation. 

how deep was the nickel ?

[CPT_GhostLight]

1 hour ago, ecoast said:

how deep was the nickel ?

The nickel was about 5 inches down in iron and modern trash infested ground. We have very mineralized ground here in Middle Earth and it is rare to be able to get signals more than 8-9 inches down, specially in heavily fertilized parks.

[Skull diver]

Holy f##k 😂

[Ogliuga]

Audio response is an adjustable signal amplification and doesn’t affect depth. A high audio response level isn’t always my first choice: deep targets seems to be like shallow objects, no difference at all. I set high audio response levels during depth tests, (6 for example). Audio response on 3-4 is perfect, in my opinion. I know people who set it on very low levels and hear a perfect amplification on deep targets and help to understand also the targets size. 

[midalake]

45 minutes ago, Ogliuga said:

Audio response is an adjustable signal amplification and doesn’t affect depth.

Audio Response 100% affects your depth.