{Deep Audio}....:minelab:....An Idea for a New E-Trac ll & other Ideas

[McNickle]

I was reading a post below (Alternative to tones) ..........I had some similar Ideas to that that I will mention last............................But...........................................................
We all know our E-Trac.......Se Or Explorer hunts deeper than ANY other machines........that is the cool legacy of Minelab machines.........................................................................................
......................................................The one option I am sure MOST of us would like to have is the DEEP AUDIO option...............Maybe a switch or filter that we can opt to turn on..................
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,IE:..............Turn DEEP Audio on and set to depth say...4" & deeper.......................all targets 0-4" give a faint tone ?.....While every target below 4" gives a boosted loader signal?
We have all thought about (surface blanking).......a term and option once given by (and I am sure other detector manufacturers---under different names).....That you could set your detector to ignore anything from 1-4" and only sound off on targets below what ever you set it for..........I know most of us have been annoyed by the shallow targets,while looking for the deeper OLDER goodies.
I don't think anyone has applied for a pat tent such as this.
A couple other ideas are...........A programmable NAME...we could attach to each [pattern or mode so we could tell the difference when we go to search a special or specific location....(If nothing else.........at least Programmable Name to be set on our computer)..
And last.......but not least...........the Idea of (Alternative to tones)...........Instead of Dogs barking or birds chirping ect. to specify the targets we want to hunt for.......................
...........................Why not make an option for {Tone Specific}........leaving all our fluty tones the same ..............but giving the option to make the desirable targets sound off in a lower or higher desirable range..................IE:...........Us Americans....Like hunting for silver dimes,Quarters,Halves,and $'s..........or conductive # 45,46,47,48.....................................
Why not give the option of making a buffalo ,or V nickle to sound off at conductive # 45........Or if we were at an older site and thought there was a chance of picking up a gold coin........................
Making all conductive numbers.....11,22,33,44.............sound off at conductive # 45..........that way the tone would definitely get our attention ?
Just throwing some Ideas out there........{ & Good ones --I-- Think}

 

[McNickle]

n/t

 

[TheMarshall]

I was reading a post below (Alternative to tones) ..........I had some similar Ideas to that that I will mention last............................But...........................................................
We all know our E-Trac.......Se Or Explorer hunts deeper than ANY other machines........that is the cool legacy of Minelab machines.........................................................................................
......................................................The one option I am sure MOST of us would like to have is the DEEP AUDIO option...............Maybe a switch or filter that we can opt to turn on..................
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,IE:..............Turn DEEP Audio on and set to depth say...4" & deeper.......................all targets 0-4" give a faint tone ?.....While every target below 4" gives a boosted loader signal?
We have all thought about (surface blanking).......a term and option once given by (and I am sure other detector manufacturers---under different names).....That you could set your detector to ignore anything from 1-4" and only sound off on targets below what ever you set it for..........I know most of us have been annoyed by the shallow targets,while looking for the deeper OLDER goodies.
I don't think anyone has applied for a pat tent such as this.
A couple other ideas are...........A programmable NAME...we could attach to each [pattern or mode so we could tell the difference when we go to search a special or specific location....(If nothing else.........at least Programmable Name to be set on our computer)..
And last.......but not least...........the Idea of (Alternative to tones)...........Instead of Dogs barking or birds chirping ect. to specify the targets we want to hunt for.......................
...........................Why not make an option for {Tone Specific}........leaving all our fluty tones the same ..............but giving the option to make the desirable targets sound off in a lower or higher desirable range..................IE:...........Us Americans....Like hunting for silver dimes,Quarters,Halves,and $'s..........or conductive # 45,46,47,48.....................................
Why not give the option of making a buffalo ,or V nickle to sound off at conductive # 45........Or if we were at an older site and thought there was a chance of picking up a gold coin........................
Making all conductive numbers.....11,22,33,44.............sound off at conductive # 45..........that way the tone would definitely get our attention ?
Just throwing some Ideas out there........{ & Good ones --I-- Think}

******************************************************************************************************

Hi there Mcnickle.........love the pictures...a sense of humour is just what the doctor ordered to dismiss any cold weather blues....Thanks

In response to your ideas.

Surface blanking....An idea that has been bandied around for several years but never gained any commercial or user backing.

The limitations of the concept is due to a 'standard' detector not being capable of absolutely determining a target's depth.

Depth indication is usually calibrated against a one inch diameter coin, so that if a atrget's MASS is different then so is the relative depth estimation.

A 'bigger' target reads shallower, whilst a 'smaller' one reads deeper.

As you rightly stated, Garrett did make a detector using (I think) dual-coil techniques to try and resolve a target's depth more accurately, but it hasn't proven to be such an advantage that other manufactures pursued the idea.

If I were involved in designing a detector requiring a better depth indicator, then there is a possible solution that would be processor based rather than coil-hardware orientated.

Problem is, the 'work-load' factor on the micro-processor, would divert precious real-time requirements more usefully applied to signal processing and essential 'house-work'.

Somewhere there is also the lingering doubt about 'creating too sophisticated' a detector. Would such a unit take away the essence of user involvement and skills?

I have a feeling that one of the joys of this hobby, is the opportunity to exercise the primitive hunting instincts innate in most males.( and females?)

Take away too much of that person involvement, and maybe you will lessen the instinctive pleasure of detecting.,,,,,,,,,,

............................

I agree with the idea, especially for my E-trac, that of being able to give a meaningful name to each mode or pattern.

Whites provide that concept

..............................

Assigning personalised sounds to numerical group numbers is also attractive, with one proviso.

As with the limitations of 'depth-blanking', errors due to a target's 'MASS' factor, then so would 'audio-ID' be inaccurate for other than well-formed coins.

.....................

Thanks Mc. for the input of your ideas, let's hope it stimulate comments, participation and other original thoughts.........TheMarshall

 

[McNickle]

******************************************************************************************************

Hi there Mcnickle.........

[size=x-large](1)[/size]Surface blanking....An idea that has been bandied around for several years but never gained any commercial or user backing.

The limitations of the concept is due to a 'standard' detector not being capable of absolutely determining a target's depth.

Depth indication is usually calibrated against a one inch diameter coin, so that if a atrget's MASS is different then so is the relative depth estimation.

A 'bigger' target reads shallower, whilst a 'smaller' one reads deeper.

............................

[size=x-large](2)[/size]I agree with the idea, especially for my E-trac, that of being able to give a meaningful name to each mode or pattern.

Whites provide that concept

..............................

[size=x-large](3)[/size]Assigning personalised sounds to numerical group numbers is also attractive, with one proviso.

As with the limitations of 'depth-blanking', errors due to a target's 'MASS' factor, then so would 'audio-ID' be inaccurate for other than well-formed coins.

.....................

Thanks Mc. for the input of your ideas, let's hope it stimulate comments, participation and other original thoughts.........TheMarshall

Thank You for answering my post Marshall...............Altho I disagree on a few points........
Issue (1) In response for an Idea of 'Deep Audio' [where a user could use such an option to lessen audio on shallow targets,,,,--OR-- Boost Audio on Deeper ones ----Over and beyond that volume of the shallower one]You stated......."The limitations of the concept is due to a 'standard' detector not being capable of absolutely determining a target's depth."
Firstly....The Etrac has the best depth pinpoint of ANY detector I have used...........Therefore it is not your standard detector...............And.......if the Etrac can show approximate depth of a target as you swing your coil over it (As allot of Other---Standard detectors can do)....I do think it is possible to make a software program to at-least........Make shallower targets give a faint audio while either boosting deep targets........Or leaving them in a medium Audio range.....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------ - --------------------------------------------------------------
# (2)..................I think naming programs or Modes [If not but just doable on your computer].....will definitely be included on the next series of E-Tracs.....{Excuse my optimism}
------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- ------------------------

[size=large](3).............I still think it possible for Minelab to tweak their software,,,,,and make it possible to Assign the already used fluty sounds to be used as well in other conductive group numbers.................Regardless of target size ect.............The Audio you here from Any present Conductive numbers should be able to be reassgnable to any other conductive number...........................
_______________ ________ _ ________ _ ________ _ _ ________________________________ __ _____________________ _________ _____________
.Even Tho as you say............................it may take more processor time.................I may be a dreamer..........................................................But most of us all carry around a flip phone that is even smaller than Captain Kirks Communicator.............................All things are possible.............You have to Dream it before you can build it. [/size]