Ralph Bryant
New member
Just like many aspects of life, we all tend to get into our own little comfort zones. This is also the case when we settle upon a certain single or few machines or manufacturers, and I know I'm as gulity of that as others. It's really important to keep an open mind though in trying new machines or "claimed" technology. Sure it can get expensive, but exploring new things tends to help keep us interested and out of the proverbial "detecting rut" sometimes. I know there have been times when I just had to take a hiatis from detecting and the forums for awhile because I was getting absolutely BORED with the hobby. But something always happens to get my interest back up in the hobby, whether new hunting possibilities, new machines, new technology that looks promising, or simply going through the same boredom routine with some of my other hobbies.
Some people like simplicity in their detectors, while others like as much complexity as possible. To some, tuning and turning knobs is a part of the enjoyment they get from detecting, others just like to beep and dig. I personally fall somewhere in between, enjoying both the practical and the technical side of the hobby and equipment. I remember very well the early days of hunting with the old BFO machines, and have seen many advancements in technology through the years. But when it comes right down to raw depth of detection, that is probably the area of least improvement, with more accomplished along the lines of discrimination and ground cancellation. After all, there is just so far (deep) you can go with a particular sized coil. We still constantly hear the battle cry that sounds like a Spam canned meat commercial on T.V........ "MORE DEPTH", but what really are the practical limits of depth ?
Suppose for instance that we had machines that would readily detect a coin-sized target and discriminate/identify the target at 10 inches deep. Now I don't know about others, but I don't often encounter many coins at that depth here in the states, even with machines capable of detecting them that deep.
What if someone were to improve on current technology to the point of doubling those depths overnight, giving us the ability to accurately detect, discriminate, identify and dig coins at 20 inches deep ? Is that going to improve your finds count to any significant degree, or is that going to put you in a position of spending twice (or more) of your time digging rather than detecting ? What I'm getting at is that there is as point somewhere along the line of diminishing returns..... or the ability to detecte deeper at the expense of having to spend more time digging those deeper targets. I don't know about you guys, but at some point, digging deeper and deeper holes stops being a hobby and starts becoming WORK !
I'm really not so sure that saying we are at a technological plateau in our machines is really going to prove to be an accurate statement. Technology has a way of taking us by surprise and catching us off-guard to what is physically and humanly possible. Look where we are today, only some 50 years after the advent of television. Look at the advancements we have seen in technology the past 100 years, and then imagine those kinds of relative advancements above and beyond what is available today. There will obviously be things done in the future that we don't even dream about today, just like the more advanced metal detectors that we have now compared to the simple BFO machines of the 60s. Will we ever get to the point of those proverbial video detectors that can see what is in the ground, or even read the dates on coins ? Will our machines advance beyond just relative conductivity values in the discrimination circuits to machines that can realistically and consistently tell us the difference between gold rings and pull-tabs ? I really don't know. I just hope this hobby of ours survives the lack of interest, hobby stagnation, and legislative hurdles and roadblocks long enough to allow us to get to that point in time...... if that's where we are headed.
As for "MORE DEPTH", I think I would much rather have a machine that will tell me the difference between the tabs and the gold rings...... or "BETTER DISCRIMINATION".
Just a few thoughts.......
Ralph
Some people like simplicity in their detectors, while others like as much complexity as possible. To some, tuning and turning knobs is a part of the enjoyment they get from detecting, others just like to beep and dig. I personally fall somewhere in between, enjoying both the practical and the technical side of the hobby and equipment. I remember very well the early days of hunting with the old BFO machines, and have seen many advancements in technology through the years. But when it comes right down to raw depth of detection, that is probably the area of least improvement, with more accomplished along the lines of discrimination and ground cancellation. After all, there is just so far (deep) you can go with a particular sized coil. We still constantly hear the battle cry that sounds like a Spam canned meat commercial on T.V........ "MORE DEPTH", but what really are the practical limits of depth ?
Suppose for instance that we had machines that would readily detect a coin-sized target and discriminate/identify the target at 10 inches deep. Now I don't know about others, but I don't often encounter many coins at that depth here in the states, even with machines capable of detecting them that deep.
What if someone were to improve on current technology to the point of doubling those depths overnight, giving us the ability to accurately detect, discriminate, identify and dig coins at 20 inches deep ? Is that going to improve your finds count to any significant degree, or is that going to put you in a position of spending twice (or more) of your time digging rather than detecting ? What I'm getting at is that there is as point somewhere along the line of diminishing returns..... or the ability to detecte deeper at the expense of having to spend more time digging those deeper targets. I don't know about you guys, but at some point, digging deeper and deeper holes stops being a hobby and starts becoming WORK !
I'm really not so sure that saying we are at a technological plateau in our machines is really going to prove to be an accurate statement. Technology has a way of taking us by surprise and catching us off-guard to what is physically and humanly possible. Look where we are today, only some 50 years after the advent of television. Look at the advancements we have seen in technology the past 100 years, and then imagine those kinds of relative advancements above and beyond what is available today. There will obviously be things done in the future that we don't even dream about today, just like the more advanced metal detectors that we have now compared to the simple BFO machines of the 60s. Will we ever get to the point of those proverbial video detectors that can see what is in the ground, or even read the dates on coins ? Will our machines advance beyond just relative conductivity values in the discrimination circuits to machines that can realistically and consistently tell us the difference between gold rings and pull-tabs ? I really don't know. I just hope this hobby of ours survives the lack of interest, hobby stagnation, and legislative hurdles and roadblocks long enough to allow us to get to that point in time...... if that's where we are headed.
As for "MORE DEPTH", I think I would much rather have a machine that will tell me the difference between the tabs and the gold rings...... or "BETTER DISCRIMINATION".
Just a few thoughts.......
Ralph
Not saying that depth is not important by any means, just depends on the ground conditions and types of hunting we do around here. Out on the relic fields in NW Arkansas where the plows had been at work for years, depth is key. In other places where we're basically hunting a couple of inches above bedrock, maybe not. I always forget to mention that I'm a trash hunter, where discrimination and separation are the biggest concerns.
