Jonathan Porter Talks Equinox And Gold Nuggets

[ophirboy]

From what I have read here the coil  noise problem seems to be confined in the main to detectors that are being used in milder soils where users have the opportunity to run the unit into the hot sensitivity zone , the instructions that come with the GM clearly state that using high manual sensitivity settings may not be possible for all conditions and for my areas , and I would guess a lot of goldfields especially in Victoria (AUS) the mineralization is so bad that even Auto plus setting is going to struggle . So for a lot of us Aussie owners the coil noise is not an issue. So for you guys in the US and other milder locations it’s either a glass half full situation or glass half empty. But personally I wish sometimes I could ramp the unit up a bit and put up with a bit of coil noise . 

[Steve Herschbach]

Gotta ask John, if the Gold Bug 2 will do just as well on your ground and your gold why put up with the noise? Just use the Gold Bug 2. I prefer the Gold Monster for my situation but it differs from yours. I can’t figure out why you persevere with the Monster. Given all you describe I would not so I must be missing something.

I would suspect a GPZ small coil would make it all a moot discussion. The sensitivity of the GPZ to small gold with the stock coil has been well proven and I have to believe a small coil would be hotter yet if they can make it small enough.

Anyway, back to Equinox and gold. For a VLF it is a true gold performer and I have to think any new VLF gold detectors we see from Minelab would be based on Multi-IQ. And no matter the machine, maybe Minelab can put some of their technology magic to work on new VLF coil designs. It is pointless to have great detectors if the coils end up being the weak point.

[Steve Herschbach]

10 hours ago, kiwijw said:

I know I have frustrated you with my bump falsing "issue" with the GM & harping on about

Just a little 

Actually I feel for your detector. I communicate with detectors better than people - detectors do talk to me. I listen to what they are telling me and act accordingly. Since Minelab never got back to you the first thing your detector is trying to tell you is maybe the coil is bad. Assuming that is not the case it is screaming at you to be turned down. Is there such a thing as detector abuse? 

What was puzzling me the most was that the GB2 is famous for its ability to resist coil knocking, which as I have explained is because it is mostly getting the small gold hots by natively working at 71 kHz. Gold Monster is using 45 kHz and then getting there with very high gain and boosted audio. This magnifies ALL signals including hardware generated issues. All things being equal if chasing the tiny bits really was the goal, it just makes more sense to me based on what you were describing to use the Gold Bug 2. Now I understand and agree about more depth on larger gold. And basically you are a balls to the wall bloke!

To be perfectly honest however other than my curiosity none of this is aimed at you specificallly. The Gold Monster was designed for novices and when you post about running in the red zone I think you are perhaps leaving a certain impression on others. I am trying in my way to make sure that novices reading these threads understand what a gain/sensitivity control is all about and why this “flaw” from my perspective is a benefit. I hate dumbed down detector’s, and if anyone wants to blame anyone for the Gold Monster being too hot, then just blame me. It would have been a crime to lock the top end of the sensitivity control at 6 or 7 just to make it safe for the masses. Performance Matters!

[Steve Herschbach]

Yeah well just wait - there are those who just can’t resist making an issue out of everything.

[Steve Herschbach]

4 hours ago, kiwijw said:

One question on the coils. The GB2 being a concentric & epoxy filled & the GM a DD. Are there any reasons why one may be better than the other in general detecting and, dear I say it....bump falsing

Concentrics are easier to make, generate more straight forward/less complex signals due to the simpler winding arrangement, and are generally better at ferrous/non-ferrous identification of flat steel, like bottle caps.

I have to admit I do hope Equinox is a huge success for the self serving reason that it makes more accessory coil variety more likely.

[Chase Goldman]

36 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Concentrics are easier to make, generate more straight forward/less complex signals due to the simpler winding arrangement, and are generally better at ferrous/non-ferrous identification of flat steel, like bottle caps.

I have to admit I do hope Equinox is a huge success for the self serving reason that it makes more accessory coil variety more likely.

Steve - I wonder if the coil drive circuitry and signal processing algorithms have to be reworked for a concentric coil?  Wonder if ML could answer (or would be willing to answer) that question?  Though I am thinning the herd significantly post-Equinox I am going to keep at least one detector that has a concentric accessory coil.  That is one of the reasons I chose to keep the F75 over the T2.  Different detectors that outwardly look like clones of each other but inwardly very different circuits and a different user interface.  The T2, however, cannot accommodate concentric coils.