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
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
masking
- Thread starter potosi
- Start date
It also depends on the settings used.
After I got my Killer Bs I noticed something. If I had my discrimination set to minimum and the sensitivity set at a slight audible buzz, I could here a signal that would go from a good response to a rejection in a split second. Sounding like junk. But if it repeated this sound as the coil was swung in one direction and repeated another sound (opposite response) in the other direction. That is a rejection followed by a short beep in an instant. That could mean a target is under iron and just off set. The actual off set is almost impossible to measure when digging an actual target and disturbing the soil.
There is another sound you get when aluminum is masking an object but the reliability of identification is not as good as when iron like materials are doing the masking. Aluminum is too close to a good response and the shape, thickness and size and depth influence the response.
Staples are a good way to practice this. Set your sensitivity at a slight audible buzz and the discrimination set all the way down. Put a quarter in a paper or card board box 3" or 4" tall. You should be able to get a signal on the quarter. Put 5 or so staples on top of the box and over the quarter. You will experience masking. You won't be able to get a good response on the quarter.
Now try off setting the quarter and listening to the response. If you have good head phones you can learn to tell when another target is there.
This works in a box and is predictable. Varying target depths and materials produce uncountable ways the scenario can be played out.
In short it is impossible to answer your question.
Cheers,
After I got my Killer Bs I noticed something. If I had my discrimination set to minimum and the sensitivity set at a slight audible buzz, I could here a signal that would go from a good response to a rejection in a split second. Sounding like junk. But if it repeated this sound as the coil was swung in one direction and repeated another sound (opposite response) in the other direction. That is a rejection followed by a short beep in an instant. That could mean a target is under iron and just off set. The actual off set is almost impossible to measure when digging an actual target and disturbing the soil.
There is another sound you get when aluminum is masking an object but the reliability of identification is not as good as when iron like materials are doing the masking. Aluminum is too close to a good response and the shape, thickness and size and depth influence the response.
Staples are a good way to practice this. Set your sensitivity at a slight audible buzz and the discrimination set all the way down. Put a quarter in a paper or card board box 3" or 4" tall. You should be able to get a signal on the quarter. Put 5 or so staples on top of the box and over the quarter. You will experience masking. You won't be able to get a good response on the quarter.
Now try off setting the quarter and listening to the response. If you have good head phones you can learn to tell when another target is there.
This works in a box and is predictable. Varying target depths and materials produce uncountable ways the scenario can be played out.
In short it is impossible to answer your question.
Cheers,
randyalbin
Member
n/t
Hi Randy,
That may be. But using rejection will not get you as close as using no rejection. That's the skill of the MDer comes in. Try the quarter in the box test. You will need a quality set of metal detector headphones. If you are willing to learn, see for your self. I have learned some things from this simple test. Pap uses this test to test all detectors to check their response to iron rejection. Rejecting pull tabs makes it even harder to get a signal on targets that are close to the source of masking.
Your orig. Bandido has different circuitry than a Vaquero and the settings do not correlate with the settings on the V.
According to Monte the orig. Bandido is the best MD Tesoro has produced for searching in iron and trash infested ground. If Monte is correct, and you are competent, then you should be able to get better results than the V.
Using methods as those described in my previous post, I can detect a masked target that's just barley offset with my Silver Sabre uMax, Cibola and Euro Sabre. That's all the Tesoros I have used with these techniques.
Happy Holidays,
That may be. But using rejection will not get you as close as using no rejection. That's the skill of the MDer comes in. Try the quarter in the box test. You will need a quality set of metal detector headphones. If you are willing to learn, see for your self. I have learned some things from this simple test. Pap uses this test to test all detectors to check their response to iron rejection. Rejecting pull tabs makes it even harder to get a signal on targets that are close to the source of masking.
Your orig. Bandido has different circuitry than a Vaquero and the settings do not correlate with the settings on the V.
According to Monte the orig. Bandido is the best MD Tesoro has produced for searching in iron and trash infested ground. If Monte is correct, and you are competent, then you should be able to get better results than the V.
Using methods as those described in my previous post, I can detect a masked target that's just barley offset with my Silver Sabre uMax, Cibola and Euro Sabre. That's all the Tesoros I have used with these techniques.
Happy Holidays,
rentasquid
New member
If there was some magic formula that allowed a person to get every coin that is masked from out of the ground, everyone would be doing it. Every person seems to find the perfect way for themselves...and if they are finding good coins, who are we to be telling them they arent doing it right? It sounds like the detector that is operating between his ears is doing a pretty decent job of discriminating!
J.
J.
I always use headphones. Recently been using Ratphones and Sunray Pro Gold - both are over the ear cup style.
If I set a machine threshold just barely audible, then unplug the headphones, I usually don't hear anything from the machine speaker.
I might miss subtle changes in the threshold. So, it's headphones for me - always.
About the only time I feel a bit uncomfortable using headphones is in hot weather and in rattlesnake territory. I might have to try the one ear headphones or something else by the time warm weather arrives again. Got me thinking now........
If I set a machine threshold just barely audible, then unplug the headphones, I usually don't hear anything from the machine speaker.
I might miss subtle changes in the threshold. So, it's headphones for me - always.
About the only time I feel a bit uncomfortable using headphones is in hot weather and in rattlesnake territory. I might have to try the one ear headphones or something else by the time warm weather arrives again. Got me thinking now........
How close does another object have to be to mask a coin from my vaquero with 8x 9 coil ?
Is that the question?
Would you have me believe that one can deal effectively with masking by using descremination? I believe Monte's take about that is more accurate.
I'm just following Monte's advice and having results with it. I had to open my ears and abandon my ego. Any of these techniques were not pioneered by me. These are things I"ve learned by taking the trouble to abandon my pre-conceived ideas and try something that goes against my grain. That means listen to the Pros and don't blow off what they say, just do it. I'm not a Pro, but I can take their advice.
I don't argue with results I admire achievments.
Why don't you try that little masking test.
It's not my test, I didn't think of it, but I'm not too good to learn from it. Even if some of us are.
Happy Hoidays,
Is that the question?
Would you have me believe that one can deal effectively with masking by using descremination? I believe Monte's take about that is more accurate.
I'm just following Monte's advice and having results with it. I had to open my ears and abandon my ego. Any of these techniques were not pioneered by me. These are things I"ve learned by taking the trouble to abandon my pre-conceived ideas and try something that goes against my grain. That means listen to the Pros and don't blow off what they say, just do it. I'm not a Pro, but I can take their advice.
I don't argue with results I admire achievments.
Why don't you try that little masking test.
It's not my test, I didn't think of it, but I'm not too good to learn from it. Even if some of us are.
Happy Hoidays,
rentasquid
New member
n/t
BarberBill
New member
There's some good things to try here, but when all is said and done, if in doubt, dig it all.
HH
Bill
HH
Bill
Target masking is something that effects ALL metal detectors contrary to what any manufacturer may advertise. The test that was referred to is an easy one to set up and, again, contrary to what may be posted by an individual or individuals will cause problems for ALL detectors. Masking can be caused by any number of ferrous or non ferrous materials being in close proximity to one another. If two targets are basically adjacent to one another at roughly the same depth the distance separating them will determine if a detector has the capability of responding to both or one or the other depending of course on the discrimination and the composition of the targets. For targets that are at different depths vertically (one above the other) the response is much more pronounced if the shallower target is being rejected and the deeper target accepted. In most cases the deeper target will be lost because of masking. This effect becomes even more pronounced as the distance between the targets is increased. So this leaves us with two choices when the deeper targets are being masked by unwanted targets beside or above them. Dig only the shallower good targets that are not masked or dig the unwanted targets in order to hopefully recover good targets that are no longer being masked.
Good comment Potosi.
If you think about an object lost, perhaps an inch, maybe 10" underground,
It's value is forever lost to society.
When these fine fellows recover something, not only they, but society is wealthier.
I enjoy design work and craftsmanship it takes to make jewelry, but don't personally care to wear it.
Many do. Fine with me when they are all eventually scrapped to make circuit boards!
Either way, we are mining a renewable resource.
There is no great deal of harm to anyone's personal trove when teaching newbies what fun this hobby is!
rmptr
If you think about an object lost, perhaps an inch, maybe 10" underground,
It's value is forever lost to society.
When these fine fellows recover something, not only they, but society is wealthier.
I enjoy design work and craftsmanship it takes to make jewelry, but don't personally care to wear it.
Many do. Fine with me when they are all eventually scrapped to make circuit boards!
Either way, we are mining a renewable resource.
There is no great deal of harm to anyone's personal trove when teaching newbies what fun this hobby is!
rmptr