Menu
What's new
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.

Minelab Equinox 800 Frequency

M

markg

New member
https://youtu.be/cIsRZL6ldVs
 
Very interesting to see how much the noise cancel actually slides the frequency :cool:
Jeff
 
Actually I was amazed at the dynamic difference from -9 to +9. I really like this machine. Even after a year I'm still 100% satisfied.
 
Tried watching but Safari says can't open, invalid address
 
\"Carolina\" said:
Tried watching but Safari says can't open, invalid address
Click to expand...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIsRZL6ldVs&feature=youtu.be

Not sure what might be wrong, try the above link.
All seems to work with Explorer, Edge, Firefox

You might try copy and paste to your browser.
 
Might have been interesting to see ....... what was the HIGH freqs in Multi freq for each of the noise cancels -9 to +9. Was i wrong but at the end when he went back into the Multi freq......was the prominent freq 7.7 Khz? Standing in the same spot...... those noise cancels can be all over the place. So it seems reducing the sensitivity before noise canceling might help.
 
I believe it would be interesting to look at the multi-frequency outputs on the spectrum analyzer and see how they vary between park 1, park 2 and field 1, field 2. It should indicate a shift towards one set or another based upon which mode one is on. I know it still transmits multi-frequencies, but perhaps weights them differently by more power at one end or the other. The manual says one mode is designed for one set of environment/targets versus the other.
 
jrjarnagin said:
I believe it would be interesting to look at the multi-frequency outputs on the spectrum analyzer and see how they vary between park 1, park 2 and field 1, field 2. It should indicate a shift towards one set or another based upon which mode one is on. I know it still transmits multi-frequencies, but perhaps weights them differently by more power at one end or the other. The manual says one mode is designed for one set of environment/targets versus the other.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe its easier for the detector to just put everything out there on every mode and simply change the pulse pattern and change what freqs its reading on the back side?
 
Thanks but the same response. Safari can't open, invalid address. I am curious what the highest frequency is you see and to what relation to noise cancel number?
 
Jason in Enid said:
I believe it would be interesting to look at the multi-frequency outputs on the spectrum analyzer and see how they vary between park 1, park 2 and field 1, field 2. It should indicate a shift towards one set or another based upon which mode one is on. I know it still transmits multi-frequencies, but perhaps weights them differently by more power at one end or the other. The manual says one mode is designed for one set of environment/targets versus the other.

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe its easier for the detector to just put everything out there on every mode and simply change the pulse pattern and change what freqs its reading on the back side?
Click to expand...

I think you're correct. Easier to analyze a chosen frequency "weighted".

Going through each mode in multi I could not tell a great deal of difference in the park and field modes.
 
markg said:
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe its easier for the detector to just put everything out there on every mode and simply change the pulse pattern and change what freqs its reading on the back side?

I think you're correct. Easier to analyze a chosen frequency "weighted".

Going through each mode in multi I could not tell a great deal of difference in the park and field modes.
Click to expand...

I can tell you from experience that the Field modes are more sensitive (responsive) to small conductors like bits of foil and brass.
 
markg said:
https://youtu.be/cIsRZL6ldVs
Click to expand...

?????????????????????????????????​

" Hi all!"

I appreciate what the gent who posted the 'analysis' intended to demonstrate, but alas, I think overall it was probably incorrect in his factual translation of that which we observed

For a start...what 'device' was he using to do the checking?

How was he 'coupling' the device to the NOX's transmission?

I ask that question, because, to me the wave-forms visually presented were 'incorrect'....so making the output questionable.

I suspect he was using some form of limited 'audio' analyzer software on his PC.

If so...that's not good enough.....His intentions were good....but you need the right type of oscilloscope to show the factuality’s of what the NOX is producing.......If you distort the input through a lack of realizing what qualities your test equipment needs to accommodate the waveforms involved, then the tests can be missleading......matt
 
My main objective of the video was to demonstrate the transmit frequencies. I have used the same technique to check three other signal frequency detectors and the said frequency matches what the manufacturer states. Actually the F75 came to exactly the same frequency to the 1/1000. I know and understand the visual wave may be a little different but to me it proved the Equinox is a true multi-frequency detector .
 
Hi Matt,
There are a couple of threads on geotech where this is discussed in more detail. His software is adequate and seems to be accurate in depicting frequency content. Several people tried various types of pickup coils and spectrum analysers. I used an HP with pi coil as a pickup and got similar results.
What is it that causes you concern?
 
bklein said:
Hi Matt,
There are a couple of threads on geotech where this is discussed in more detail. His software is adequate and seems to be accurate in depicting frequency content. Several people tried various types of pickup coils and spectrum analysers. I used an HP with pi coil as a pickup and got similar results.
What is it that causes you concern?
Click to expand...

*********************************************************​

Thanks [size=large]bk[/size] for the reply.

My concern relates to the 'images' in the original video.......they were not of the TX waveform for the NOX.

Here is my example of the true TX wave-form.....Beach-1 mode; in which I've endeavored to capture an a sequence of the 'Repetition'

[attachment 364868 NOX600Beach-3.jpg]




Shove that through a professional's analyser .....

Can you tell me what your evaluation would be ?

I've shown the major graticule calibration; 50 micro-seconds....(there are less apparent sub 10 uS markings)

The full width of the pulse=train is about 500 uS......which implies that the repetition-rate is 2 Kilo Hertz.

Now see if you can identify the harmonics and their weighting from the 'live' image.

[ I've done the maths and have my interpretation (frequencies and weightings ); but I'll keep that in reserve until others have expressed their evaluations. ]

There is a missing factor I cannot include.....it's the CHANNEL number relationship at the moment of taking the picture.......

Your Thoughts?.....matt.

[size=x-large]I CRITICIZE Minelab's meanness in NOT giving the Equinox 600 owners the advanced option of MANUAL SELECTION of the NOISE CHANNEL.[/size]

So please MINELAB......let's have a simple software up-grade, and correct the erroneous omission.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top