Mike (Virginia Beach)
New member
They were in Disc. If they were in All Metal, they would all sound the same and then what would be the point of recording them?
Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
Genuine Excalibur Sounds, Recorded From Various Items
- Thread starter Mike (Virginia Beach)
- Start date
"They were in Disc. If they were in All Metal, they would all sound the same and then what would be the point of recording them?"
Exactly. Thanks for clarifying. It just did not state that the sounds were in Disc and not all metal. I wanted to make sure my All Metal Setting was working correctly. Treat me as new, green, dumb!!
You guys who take the time to provide info like this are all a great help and I really thank you for the head start!
Listening for tone differences and maybe "shape" of target response is a Discrimination. undertaking, only then? From reading, I still get the feeling that all metal is supposed to give variation in tone and can aid in target ID as well. It confused me because I can only go by my machine and to me, all metal responses sound alike other than breaking up nulls from Iron or wire, and even this may be subtle. But it's clear that AM locating, and quickly switching to Disc Number 1 is effective in rejecting iron. I'll have to work hard on learning the subtleties of viable targets though and the recording is a nice reference. My white gold and yellow gold rings give very different tones, I noticed that early on.
Also it may be obvious to experienced Excal users, but terms like "set Sensitivity at 5", or set sensitivity at 2 O'clock seemed to be used arbitrarily. My Excal 800 has no Sensitivity numbers on it. So, I am assuming that setting at number 5 means halfway (12 O'clock??) and setting at 2 O'clock is just that.....2 O'clock on a watch face as if total clockwise was say 5-6 o'clock. I'd have to find the text in the book by Clynick but he used "Number 5" and then "O'clock" at different times. Frankly as a newbie which I am, I'd prefer: "Turn Sensitivity half way clockwise from where you click out of Auto , to reduce sensitivity if threshold becomes unsteady". At least, Excal makers could have used numbers on the dial areas. I think Volume is obvious since you get immediate feedback. Discrimination has numbers but ironically, number one seems to be where everyone recommends that setting! So who needs numbers there? Sensitivity is confusing because it really can be difficult to know if you are losing major depth and maybe are reducing it unnecessarily not to mention that locations and spots within a location effect sensitivity differently. So, Sens should have had numbers. It's too subtle of a control to have to wonder if counter clockwise or clockwise increases or decreases Sens. "Turn up sensitivity"........OK, this means turn it counterclockwise to make it more sensitive? Or turn it clockwise to reduce sensitivity? Just an example of what was sort of bending my mind as a total newbie with the excal. Now I know that clockwise decreases it but I have to say, I had to wonder and got very confused each time I read about it . Sorry for the "book"! No need to really comment on it all but I figured general feedback from a newbie might help you pundits communicate with guys like me who have not earned their eye patch yet. Arrrrrrr....met a pirate with a steering wheel in his pants. When I pointed it out he said...."Arrr....it's driv'n me nuts!"
Exactly. Thanks for clarifying. It just did not state that the sounds were in Disc and not all metal. I wanted to make sure my All Metal Setting was working correctly. Treat me as new, green, dumb!!
You guys who take the time to provide info like this are all a great help and I really thank you for the head start!Listening for tone differences and maybe "shape" of target response is a Discrimination. undertaking, only then? From reading, I still get the feeling that all metal is supposed to give variation in tone and can aid in target ID as well. It confused me because I can only go by my machine and to me, all metal responses sound alike other than breaking up nulls from Iron or wire, and even this may be subtle. But it's clear that AM locating, and quickly switching to Disc Number 1 is effective in rejecting iron. I'll have to work hard on learning the subtleties of viable targets though and the recording is a nice reference. My white gold and yellow gold rings give very different tones, I noticed that early on.
Also it may be obvious to experienced Excal users, but terms like "set Sensitivity at 5", or set sensitivity at 2 O'clock seemed to be used arbitrarily. My Excal 800 has no Sensitivity numbers on it. So, I am assuming that setting at number 5 means halfway (12 O'clock??) and setting at 2 O'clock is just that.....2 O'clock on a watch face as if total clockwise was say 5-6 o'clock. I'd have to find the text in the book by Clynick but he used "Number 5" and then "O'clock" at different times. Frankly as a newbie which I am, I'd prefer: "Turn Sensitivity half way clockwise from where you click out of Auto , to reduce sensitivity if threshold becomes unsteady". At least, Excal makers could have used numbers on the dial areas. I think Volume is obvious since you get immediate feedback. Discrimination has numbers but ironically, number one seems to be where everyone recommends that setting! So who needs numbers there? Sensitivity is confusing because it really can be difficult to know if you are losing major depth and maybe are reducing it unnecessarily not to mention that locations and spots within a location effect sensitivity differently. So, Sens should have had numbers. It's too subtle of a control to have to wonder if counter clockwise or clockwise increases or decreases Sens. "Turn up sensitivity"........OK, this means turn it counterclockwise to make it more sensitive? Or turn it clockwise to reduce sensitivity? Just an example of what was sort of bending my mind as a total newbie with the excal. Now I know that clockwise decreases it but I have to say, I had to wonder and got very confused each time I read about it . Sorry for the "book"! No need to really comment on it all but I figured general feedback from a newbie might help you pundits communicate with guys like me who have not earned their eye patch yet. Arrrrrrr....met a pirate with a steering wheel in his pants. When I pointed it out he said...."Arrr....it's driv'n me nuts!"
Mike (Virginia Beach)
New member
OK, here is where you are getting confused on the sensitivity thing.
You say you have an Excal, not an Excal II, right? The sensitivity knob calibrations on the Excal II are different...changed to try to eliminate some of the confusion of the Excal knob graduations.
On the Excal there are no marks on the sensitivity control, thus the references to the clock positions by users. The 12 o'clock position is approximately in the middle of the range and where most Excals achieve the best overall depth with the best overall stability. And all the way clockwise is the LEAST sensitive with all the way counter-clockwise (without going into "Auto") being the MOST sensitive or strongest setting. Generally, if you have an Excal 800 you can run a little "hotter" than with a 1000 and maybe do 10 o'clock (or better) on the sens. With the 10" coil somewhere between 11 o'clock and 1 o'clock would probably be more stable and still get great depth.
On the Excal II the sensitivity knob is graduated from "1" to "10", with 1 being the LOWEST setting (least sensitive, and this is fully clockwise) and 9 the HIGHEST...just like the Excal, but with numbers. And 10 is "Auto", which supposedly automatically adjusts to the highest possible sensitivity for conditions. Most experienced users ignore "Auto" and go for something close to "12 o'clock" (Excal) or "6" (Excal II). You can see the Excal II marks here:
http://www.minelab.com/__files/f/4077/4901-0064-1.4%20Instruction%20Manual%20Excalibur%20II%20screen.pdf
Hopefully that explanation clears it up.
As for the rest, I personally never use "pinpoint" (which is all metal) and I don't discriminate anything. I run it wide open on the disc, let it naturally filter out the iron (null) and listen to it all. With experience you can get a 99% accuracy on what a penny or a bottlecap sounds like and be able to pass up some trash, but ultimately, the best stuff is found by those who did it all. I use the tones to tip me off to just how hard I want to work to get a difficult target. If I hear gold I usually know it and will more likely work my butt off in the surf for a gold sound than for a penny or quarter sound.
You say you have an Excal, not an Excal II, right? The sensitivity knob calibrations on the Excal II are different...changed to try to eliminate some of the confusion of the Excal knob graduations.
On the Excal there are no marks on the sensitivity control, thus the references to the clock positions by users. The 12 o'clock position is approximately in the middle of the range and where most Excals achieve the best overall depth with the best overall stability. And all the way clockwise is the LEAST sensitive with all the way counter-clockwise (without going into "Auto") being the MOST sensitive or strongest setting. Generally, if you have an Excal 800 you can run a little "hotter" than with a 1000 and maybe do 10 o'clock (or better) on the sens. With the 10" coil somewhere between 11 o'clock and 1 o'clock would probably be more stable and still get great depth.
On the Excal II the sensitivity knob is graduated from "1" to "10", with 1 being the LOWEST setting (least sensitive, and this is fully clockwise) and 9 the HIGHEST...just like the Excal, but with numbers. And 10 is "Auto", which supposedly automatically adjusts to the highest possible sensitivity for conditions. Most experienced users ignore "Auto" and go for something close to "12 o'clock" (Excal) or "6" (Excal II). You can see the Excal II marks here:
http://www.minelab.com/__files/f/4077/4901-0064-1.4%20Instruction%20Manual%20Excalibur%20II%20screen.pdf
Hopefully that explanation clears it up.
As for the rest, I personally never use "pinpoint" (which is all metal) and I don't discriminate anything. I run it wide open on the disc, let it naturally filter out the iron (null) and listen to it all. With experience you can get a 99% accuracy on what a penny or a bottlecap sounds like and be able to pass up some trash, but ultimately, the best stuff is found by those who did it all. I use the tones to tip me off to just how hard I want to work to get a difficult target. If I hear gold I usually know it and will more likely work my butt off in the surf for a gold sound than for a penny or quarter sound.
Awesome and precise answer. Now I understand why I was getting so confused. I have not had that much of a chance to work in Disc 1 and I thought that producing a steady threshold was more difficult for me in moving water than if I used all metal but I know I have not worked this through enough to even make a comment like that. I'll take your advise. Now that I realize the gradients are marked differently, I won't get thrown by numerical references. Thanks. Yes, I bought an older excal 800 with horseshoe shaped coil. I did read where it could be run slightly hotter. i just need to play with Disc 1/Threshold/Sensitivity more in moving water and see where the best combo occurs. I ordered Clynick's first book on the Excalibur but it is backordered still. I think had I gotten this book first, it may have made more sense. Thanks Mike!
Russ
Russ
Mike (Virginia Beach)
New member
No problem...glad to help.
I have the Excal with 10" coil and I usually run it at 12 noon in the wet sand and 1 o'clock in the water. I find that if you lessen the sensitivity a little in the moving water it helps make the machine a lot more stable. Also, most of your in-water targets tend to not be as deep as many that are locked in the wet sand and tend to sink deeper as the waves come in and wash back out, so you don't need quite as much sensitivity. I get most of my best finds though in the wet sand at low tide by the water's edge. Seems to be the hot spot, at least at our beaches.
Happy hunting
I have the Excal with 10" coil and I usually run it at 12 noon in the wet sand and 1 o'clock in the water. I find that if you lessen the sensitivity a little in the moving water it helps make the machine a lot more stable. Also, most of your in-water targets tend to not be as deep as many that are locked in the wet sand and tend to sink deeper as the waves come in and wash back out, so you don't need quite as much sensitivity. I get most of my best finds though in the wet sand at low tide by the water's edge. Seems to be the hot spot, at least at our beaches.
Happy hunting
OldBeechnut
Well-known member
Your welcome Darkskys, on the Links
Best advice is from Mike and VBmax, Max said, " I paid over a thousand dollars for the best discriminating detector made why would I not use it" let your machine do the work for you {set it up and go hunting}. As a rookie dig everything that gives you a tone and in time you will be able to distinguish the difference between a PT, clad and a gold rings...{more good advice for OC & VB....Hunt wet sand at low tide by the water's edge}. Stay away from the AM/PP for a year or so. Good Luck, you have one of the best machines for OC, I know of several Pirates that would kill for the Old Horseshoe Coil Xcal's.....Joe
Best advice is from Mike and VBmax, Max said, " I paid over a thousand dollars for the best discriminating detector made why would I not use it" let your machine do the work for you {set it up and go hunting}. As a rookie dig everything that gives you a tone and in time you will be able to distinguish the difference between a PT, clad and a gold rings...{more good advice for OC & VB....Hunt wet sand at low tide by the water's edge}. Stay away from the AM/PP for a year or so. Good Luck, you have one of the best machines for OC, I know of several Pirates that would kill for the Old Horseshoe Coil Xcal's.....Joe
Thanks. I'll use Disc 1, high volume, low threshold volume and work on the sensitivity as required. Yes, I would never blame the detector. I spent many an hour reading, researching. I think the put down of the Excals mainly comes from folks that might expect less of a learning curve. I mean, 17 Freq is going to mean that an understanding of how to tune is mandatory under varying conditions. Transitory things like shore to water and back seem to be more difficult to tune for than just shore or water as far as sensitivity settings go but that stands to reason. I think I'll be trying to find some trench in water and stay in and about it after tuning it in and calming it down. I read a post about searching a plowed field and the difficulty in negotiating the wave like pattern that the furrows created. Anyway, my biggest "fear" is false signals all over the place in the water, especially from currents and waves and this has made me go back to AM/PP settings. I'll have to work on learning to set the Sensitivity for max depth but steadiness too. See ya when you are down. Let me know. I'll report on anything interesting. I plan on getting to the beach anyway this winter and see what I can stir up.
Russ
Russ
Mike (Virginia Beach)
New member
Hey, one more thing on the falsing in the water. Many of us have found that if you use a coil cover, the salt water and salty sand will get trapped in between the cover and the coil and create all kinds of havoc. I don't use on myself. I took some spray-on truck bedliner and covered the bottom and sides of the coil with it. When it wears down, I re-apply it. Keeps the coil from wearing through and no trapped sand or salt. Much more stable. Also, and this is a big one...if you are getting the battery in the water, either getting it soaked or submerging it, you need to make sure the securing ring is tight enough to get a good seal. If it's loose, it will make the machine false. You want to coat the rubber gasket around the prongs with a light coating on silicone grease and then tighten up the ring snuggly.
It shouldn't be such a problem keeping the machine stable or getting it to keep a decent threshold. Try losing the coil cover for one outing, make sure the battery ring is nice and tight, and run the sens at 12 noon. See how it does for you. Also, the coils are subject to splitting on the seams over time. If water gets into the coil, it can also be a factor. Inspect it very closely.
It shouldn't be such a problem keeping the machine stable or getting it to keep a decent threshold. Try losing the coil cover for one outing, make sure the battery ring is nice and tight, and run the sens at 12 noon. See how it does for you. Also, the coils are subject to splitting on the seams over time. If water gets into the coil, it can also be a factor. Inspect it very closely.
Mike (Virginia Beach)
New member
That's what the forums are all about.
Happy New Year!
Happy New Year!
Critterhunter
New member
Wow, stumbled upon this thread and think it's worth a bump. Here's the latest link to his audio files, along with his ID chart and a few other useful Sov/Excal things...
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=28a3469740f890ed&id=28A3469740F890ED%21142&uc=1&sa=436090039
And in case you missed it, this awesome "trash or treasure" sound game for the Sov/Excal...
http://www.thingforum.com/trash_or_treasure.htm
And more sounds can be found here...
http://jimyce.tripod.com/sounds.html
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=28a3469740f890ed&id=28A3469740F890ED%21142&uc=1&sa=436090039
And in case you missed it, this awesome "trash or treasure" sound game for the Sov/Excal...
http://www.thingforum.com/trash_or_treasure.htm
And more sounds can be found here...
http://jimyce.tripod.com/sounds.html
Mike (Virginia Beach)
New member
Hey Critter,
I'm glad some folks are still getting some use from this stuff. I'll leave it out there as long as they do.
I'm still around and hunting...just don't post much these days. Too much Internet (and other stuff) to cover and too little time, you know how it is.
Mike
I'm glad some folks are still getting some use from this stuff. I'll leave it out there as long as they do.
I'm still around and hunting...just don't post much these days. Too much Internet (and other stuff) to cover and too little time, you know how it is.
Mike
Critterhunter
New member
In terms of tones, Minelab gives an official # (16?), but I remember a thread a long time back where a guy used some kind of audio analyzer and claimed that he found far more variations in tones than the human ear could ever even hear or something like that, based on target conductivity. Not saying it's true or not. Just wish I could find that old thread to refresh my memory on it. If anybody can dig it up please post a thread link.
But regardless, in terms of audio "traits"...There are many on the BBS units. They have a unique, rich, long, detailed language, like the cream of the crop analog machines back in the day, yet with the numerous tone alerts of a Minelab. Three years out and I'm still learning what this machine can tell me, and don't think I'll ever "graduate" from Sovereign Linguistics- Advanced Class.
It's not just the raw power and depth of the BBS units, it's also the rich language that makes them a heavy hitter for certain forms of detecting. Two namely- Avoiding *some* obvious trash when hunting for rings, and being able to robustly hear a deep old coin thanks to the long drawn out response these units make.
But regardless, in terms of audio "traits"...There are many on the BBS units. They have a unique, rich, long, detailed language, like the cream of the crop analog machines back in the day, yet with the numerous tone alerts of a Minelab. Three years out and I'm still learning what this machine can tell me, and don't think I'll ever "graduate" from Sovereign Linguistics- Advanced Class.
It's not just the raw power and depth of the BBS units, it's also the rich language that makes them a heavy hitter for certain forms of detecting. Two namely- Avoiding *some* obvious trash when hunting for rings, and being able to robustly hear a deep old coin thanks to the long drawn out response these units make.Mike (Virginia Beach)
New member
Somebody else may correct me, but I THINK...since the BBS technology is based on 17 frequencies...that would equate to 17 separate and distinct tones. That's what I have always believed to be the case. Of course, I suppose that a particular tone of a particular frequency could sound different on various objects due to the depth, position of the target (flat coin or coin on its side, for example) co-located metallic objects of different material, soil iron content, etc. There is probably not a cut-and-dried answer for those reasons.
All things being equal, I think there are 17 tones to match the 17 frequencies and every type of metal on the planet falls into one of those frequencies.
EDIT: Just thought of something...if one of the 17 is iron, then there's no tone for that...NULL, in which case your quote of the "16" figure would make sense.
All things being equal, I think there are 17 tones to match the 17 frequencies and every type of metal on the planet falls into one of those frequencies.
EDIT: Just thought of something...if one of the 17 is iron, then there's no tone for that...NULL, in which case your quote of the "16" figure would make sense.
Critterhunter
New member
Glad to see somebody from back "in the day" a few years back posting a bit again on the forum. If you see the number of people who've read threads in this forum versus those who post, obviously there are far more lurkers than posters. Shame it's that way, but I can't blame some people for wanting to keep a low profile for various reasons. I've got people who email or PM me who I never see dare post in the forums. Such is life and the internet...
But, far as the frequencies/tone thing. I don't think either is related. Never heard it was. All based on the conductivity value and the scaling of tones they built into the electronics, I would think. After all, if that logic followed suit, then all the single frequency machines would only have one tone. That may be a huge stretch in logic, but you know what I mean...
All I remember was a thread I ran across several years back, where a guy used an audio spectrum analyzer or some kind of high tech gizmo as such, in which he swept targets of various conductivity values across the Sovereign, and found far more tone variations then what was the official count. If I remember right he said far more than the human ear could hear. Then again, as it stands right now, I bet most of us couldn't even distinguish the official stated tone variations listed for the BBS units, so I don't know why, even if his claims were true, it would be all that important. Far more important to learn the variations in tone, the mixed tones, the traits of the tones/audio, IMO.
It can't be over stated, and I'm not doing that, but of all the machines I've owned over the years, by far this one has the most telling audio on target traits. Yes, I've owned a few machines that might have been able to relate target traits nearly as well, but not with the numerous tone alerts thrown in to add "inflections" on the words, so to speak.
There is good reason why some guys are still die hard analog "men". One being that some of those units relate target audio traits in fine detail, much like the advocates of old vinyl records versus digital CDs. Something gets lost in translation when you run the audio or VDI through too many layers of electronic or software processing. Sure, the Sovereign is a digital wonderland under the hood, but both it's audio and VDI isn't washed away in the process.
As an example, the VDI, being just a 2V scale output, might seem rather primitive. But, for one thing it's very "instant". What you hear is what you instantly hear, without a lag between the two when separated by layers of complex processing. And, although it's not fancy, that 2V scale, much like some old analog needle detectors, provides some very high and fine resolution in targets. I don't know off hand of any machine that has as such distinct scaling in the foil to copper penny range, where I could almost bet money on a nickel versus the higher reading of where tabs begin, for one thing.
Yea, I'm simply all goo-goo over this Sovereign thing. I've owned this, and I've owned that. Finally I've found the depth of "this", yet with the audio and other traits of "that". If I had to put a finger on it, it's like the best of White's VDI, audio, and discrimination traits, meshed with the best of those from a Minelab. It's just that I had to build my own shaft to get the hardware part of the Whites (lighter and more user friendly) meshed with the Minelab side of the hardware too.
I've wandered for years, and as corny as it sounds, I can finally say I've found a machine I call home. I always, despite how many years I owned certain machines...always wanted something more...Depth, coil selection, more tones, more informative audio traits, higher VDI resolution, etc, etc. I'm not saying the Sovereign is the perfect machine for everybody, but it is the perfect combination of features for me. I don't "want" for anything more now...
But, far as the frequencies/tone thing. I don't think either is related. Never heard it was. All based on the conductivity value and the scaling of tones they built into the electronics, I would think. After all, if that logic followed suit, then all the single frequency machines would only have one tone.
That may be a huge stretch in logic, but you know what I mean...All I remember was a thread I ran across several years back, where a guy used an audio spectrum analyzer or some kind of high tech gizmo as such, in which he swept targets of various conductivity values across the Sovereign, and found far more tone variations then what was the official count. If I remember right he said far more than the human ear could hear. Then again, as it stands right now, I bet most of us couldn't even distinguish the official stated tone variations listed for the BBS units, so I don't know why, even if his claims were true, it would be all that important. Far more important to learn the variations in tone, the mixed tones, the traits of the tones/audio, IMO.
It can't be over stated, and I'm not doing that, but of all the machines I've owned over the years, by far this one has the most telling audio on target traits. Yes, I've owned a few machines that might have been able to relate target traits nearly as well, but not with the numerous tone alerts thrown in to add "inflections" on the words, so to speak.
There is good reason why some guys are still die hard analog "men". One being that some of those units relate target audio traits in fine detail, much like the advocates of old vinyl records versus digital CDs. Something gets lost in translation when you run the audio or VDI through too many layers of electronic or software processing. Sure, the Sovereign is a digital wonderland under the hood, but both it's audio and VDI isn't washed away in the process.
As an example, the VDI, being just a 2V scale output, might seem rather primitive. But, for one thing it's very "instant". What you hear is what you instantly hear, without a lag between the two when separated by layers of complex processing. And, although it's not fancy, that 2V scale, much like some old analog needle detectors, provides some very high and fine resolution in targets. I don't know off hand of any machine that has as such distinct scaling in the foil to copper penny range, where I could almost bet money on a nickel versus the higher reading of where tabs begin, for one thing.
Yea, I'm simply all goo-goo over this Sovereign thing.
I've owned this, and I've owned that. Finally I've found the depth of "this", yet with the audio and other traits of "that". If I had to put a finger on it, it's like the best of White's VDI, audio, and discrimination traits, meshed with the best of those from a Minelab. It's just that I had to build my own shaft to get the hardware part of the Whites (lighter and more user friendly) meshed with the Minelab side of the hardware too. I've wandered for years, and as corny as it sounds, I can finally say I've found a machine I call home. I always, despite how many years I owned certain machines...always wanted something more...Depth, coil selection, more tones, more informative audio traits, higher VDI resolution, etc, etc. I'm not saying the Sovereign is the perfect machine for everybody, but it is the perfect combination of features for me. I don't "want" for anything more now...