The Tesoro Detectors Are Crushing On Ebay

[YubaJ]

The coin in the video had a lot more mass than the individual nails. Using a smaller coin would have been impressive.

[D&P-OR]

1 hour ago, YubaJ said:

The coin in the video had a lot more mass than the individual nails. Using a smaller coin would have been impressive.

That was exactly my impression when I seen that video.

[Dubious]

6 hours ago, Digalicious said:

I can't see how an analog detector would be better at unmasking in iron than a digital detector. After all, it's the same signal either way. Plus, any detector can do what is shown in the video, as long as the engineers introduce a low enough iron bias setting. Such a low iron bias can unmask great in a controlled tests with nails lying flat, but out in the wild with nails at different orientations, would likely result in major iron falsing.

A cpu-based digital detector might suffer from circuitry that is just too slow in running the code to keep up with a swing across certain configurations, depending on what it is trying to do.  A true analog detector likely wouldn't have that problem.  I think this is much less of an issue with the newer machines.  I believe I still have a couple of old Tesoro detectors, and may do some comparisons.

[Digalicious]

5 hours ago, Dubious said:

A cpu-based digital detector might suffer from circuitry that is just too slow in running the code to keep up with a swing across certain configurations, depending on what it is trying to do.  A true analog detector likely wouldn't have that problem.  I think this is much less of an issue with the newer machines.  I believe I still have a couple of old Tesoro detectors, and may do some comparisons.

Hi Dubios.

An iron unmasking video comparing a true analog detector to a digital detector would be cool to see. Although I don't see speed as being a factor when trying to unmask in iron, because the detector sees the multiple targets as one target, regardless of speed. Speed is definitely a factor in separation though.

Also, speed isn't an issue on detector CPUs, because for detector usage, even bottom of the barrel CPUs are more than capable of the maximum needed speed for detector signal processing. For example, a typical CPU for a metal detector, has so little speed requirements, that the CPUs for that purpose cost about $5 to $10. Put more simply, the CPU in no way causes any sort of speed bottleneck in a metal detector 🙂

 

[RickUK]

Some analogue detectors are decent as they have some specific features that detectorist are after ie like good in iron infested sites,but for the most part Tesoro detector are very old technology and they never change to what the 'customer' wanted rather they supplied machines what they thought folks should need and alas because of that they became a has been company.

I still own 2 Tesoro and 2 Laser detectors which is what had been made in theory specifically for the UK market and our detecting needs,but the era for Tesoro machines was year ago but they still carried on producing machines that no one really wanted,yes you will always find the die hard fan boys but although i own 4 of the companies machines and they are in mint condition i have not used them in years and i mean years.

Prices will start rising up gradually as the decent machines are being snapped up by fan boys and folks who want to kindle trips down memory lane,but that is why they went under because they never produced what customers want,i certainly would never buy such a machine when you can get a modern machine that has everything the customer wants and for a much cheaper price than what Tesoro had been selling them right upto when they folded.

If you dont change with the market then detector manufactures will end up like Tesoro and Whites,these are of course just my personal opinion/s.

[DSMITH]

(because the detector sees the multiple targets as one target)

I can tell you from personal experience that statement right there is not correct with these newer analog detectors like the Vista X, Golden Mask 4WD and the new Golden Mask 7, there could very well be some digital processing going on with those three detectors as to how much I have no clue other than what I was told about the three I have, i own those three analogs plus a couple more, and you can literally lay a coin (Dime) under a pile of nails and the nails are not even seen but those three detectors I mentioned will see the Non Ferrous Dime only

the GM 7 is not a fully Analog detector it is 80% analog and 20% digital

Do I think these Analogs are perfect detectors absolutely not things can always be improved upon, but for me since I pretty much dig every good Non Ferrous tone the analogs work great for me, i still have some detectors with a cell phone screen, and have no intentions of getting rid of the ones I have, but right now i am all about the fun and simplicity of the Analogs, and ease of set up for detecting the ground I detect

 

[Digalicious]

DSMITH,

Analog and digital are just different ways of manipulating electrons to one's desire.

Analog does it with a continuous but varying flow of electrons. Digital does it by a series of ones and zeros. Neither method has any bearing on the detector's iron unmasking performance. 

What would make a difference in iron unmasking performance, is how the engineers designed that particular detector. For example, how they designed the iron bias, the algorithms, and the coil.

[Mike_Hillis]

For me, analog is in the audio.  Analog audio is much different than a digital beep and you have to use the concentric coils for the best benefits.  For instance, on the old BH Tracker IV, in Tone mode, steel bottle caps sounded good at the pre-amble and peak signal, but the post-amble ended on a screech.   Easy peasy identifier.   On the Gold Mountain King Cobra, Tesoro Pantera and Golden Sabre II, you can hear the buzz of light foil, items with sharp angles give a harsh sound, and when using the tone notch breaks, the tones blended/bled into one another at the break points and gave a lot of information just by how much of one tone is blended into the other tone.   The new toned Golden uMax was a great small jewelry hunter as the tone arrangement change made it easier to hear the mixed tone bleeds and you could adjust it down into the iron range.   Easy to hear target sizes too, however digital detectors are good at that too.

I agree with Dig on Iron Bias (how much iron range is available for discrimination).  The engineers build that in.  I don't think its just a feature of an analog detector.  Just looking at Tesoro detectors.... different models were build with different iron bias ranges... they just called it degrees:  180s, 120s, and 90s.  My Golden Sabre II is a 90.  The Golden uMax is a 120.   For reference the Tejon is a 180 in regards to iron bias.

HH Mike

[JCR]

Best of both worlds is Analog quality audio nuance + fast, smart Digital signal processing.

[EL NINO77]

In this "iron carpet" test of mine, a small 15.5mm nickel coin is used.. this is a super difficult test...
Note that Vista Gold Gain 30khz... does not give any false signal on the nails...because this test is also very difficult to manage the detector/ discrimination/ in such a quantity of old iron..

The purpose of this test is the best detector setting for this type of separation... as well as to compare my detectors under such detection conditions...

to see the complexity of the test...I still use Tesoro  Mojave..as a reference machine for this test...