multi frequency

[Picketwire]

Picket, please share whatever you feel is interesting. Maybe they explained why multi is the new thing?
is it because of better response in many different soils?

On the same forum I mentioned is another thread titled "Minelab Equinox Owners-Question" that answers what I wanted to know. The thread is quite long but also mentions the CZ detectors and compares them to the Equinox. It is quite interesting. Like I said if you haven't figured out which forum, pm me. I don't want to be banned here.

 

[Picketwire]

When I started this thread I considered calling it "hype" which is what I was seeing in regard to SMF. There were many claims like "obsolete", best ever, etc by people who used SMF detectors. I was tired of the hype but I decided not to call it "hype" because it would offend owners of SMF detectors whose opinions I respect. There is a tendency for people to defend what they have with "I found things I never found before". This does not describe the process that makes it better. Hence the request for people with knowledge of electronics and hopefully metal detector design electronics. I had not considered non-disclosure agreements at the time. I also requested that people that own both tell me what they think about it because people who only have either SMF, or do not have SMF like me, cannot say what the difference is or the advantages and disadvantages . I don't believe one is better than another, that one obsoletes the rest, the the new is better than the old, etc. but have seen it on numerous forums. The answer that these responses are not true does nothing to explain why, which is what I am after.

I said from the first I didn't want a street fight and was afraid, after reading the first response by u2robert that he didn't want to respond, that that was where this thread was headed and with the response:

"Experts" ???? Care to share the names of those 'Experts' and how you determined them to qualify for that rating?

I can see that this is where it is headed. I consider at least one an expert and am sure many other detectorists consider him one too. I am not here to argue who is an expert. I am here to learn more about SMF detectors and why I should consider buying one or the other. I asked for the thread to be deleted because of where it seemed headed and asked for responses through "conversations" and did get a few responses that i very much appreciated, much more than responses that question my intelligence. I have never inferred that I am an expert. While I preferred "conversations", I have received more responses on this thread and are thankful for them. Big Tony gave me excellent advice to go to other forums and to threads about Minelab and that is where I found what I think is interesting. Did that prove SMF is better under all conditions? I am not ready to say that but it did give some insight into the differences in processing which is what I was looking for. It gave me a place to start my research on the processes and why I should or should not spend hard earned cash on a different process detector.

 

[Carl-NC]

Picket, I design metal detectors (FTP). Depending on how well its done, MF will have a number of advantages over SF. The first & most obvious is salt cancel. MF can work right into the surf where SF will give you fits. In the desert this will help with alkali soil after a rain. Practically all MF designs I've tried do a good job at salt cancel.
Second, MF processes more information about the target and can potentially give better target ID, or perhaps do a better job with iron ID. Same with the ground signal, and can potentially do a better job at ground balancing. "Potentially" is key here. The Fisher CZs were notorious for mis-identifying deep iron. The White's V3 had ground balance problems.
Regardless of the design, MF spreads the transmit power amongst 2 or more frequencies which means that each TX frequency cannot be as strong as a same SF detector. So a potential drawback is a compromise in depth. As an example, the V3 will hit silver targets deeper in 2.5kHz-only mode and small gold deeper in 22.5kHz-only mode than it does in MF mode. The Minelab BBS/FBS are renowned for hitting deep silver but that's because they primarily transmit 3.125kHz; the 25kHz TX frequency is relatively weak and so is their response to small gold.
Bottom line is that all detectors come with a dose of hype and you should buy the detector for the job at hand. If I were hunting a trashy beach then MF, no doubt. If I'm hunting fairly clean beaches I would probably use a PI. If I'm nugget hunting then either a high-freq SF or a PI, depending on ground conditions and nugget size. If I'm coin hunting then a MF might be the ticket, but a good SF will also work well. If there is a lot of trash then I will focus more on response speed and audio qualities more than whether it SF or MF. And so on.

 

[Monte]

'Picketwire' I was about to respond, but NOW you and the rest of us have heard from a REAL EXPERT! Yes, some consider me an Expert when it comes to learning, knowing and using detectors in a variety of applications, but I don't call myself that. I am an EXPERienced and Avid Detectorist. Carl, on the othe-hand, is one of the most studied-up, smart-thinking, and honest as it comes Design Engineers you'll find these days ... regardless of the detector manufacturer.. He's briefer thn I am, which I am sure a lot of folks like, and he also emphasized a key comment. Note that he clearly defined the comment using 'potentially.' Also, in his closing line related to Coin Hunting, he stated that a MF might be
an okay choice, but so could a very good Single-Frequency detector.

That's what I try to get across to a lot of folks that MF doesn't mean "the best" or 'perfect' and it is also why I own and use BOTH a Single Frequency and Multi-Frequency group of detectors, selecting the one that works best for me and my needs for the task-at-hand.

'Thank You' Carl!

Monte

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

My perspective is that of the layman - just an ordinary guy who enjoys the hobby and trying different machines.

Over the years I have owned (or do own) several SMF machines: Etrac, CTX 3030, V3i, Apex, Vanquish 440. I also own several selectable frequency machines - multi Kruzer, Anfibio multi, ORX, and Deus - and have owned a number of single frequency machines.

My best guess is that the one machine that I’ve had the most success with is the Whites MX5. While I consider the MX5 to be a very good machine, my success (with it) is far more likely due to using it a lot, and to understanding what it was telling me. I trust the MX5 and I really enjoyed using it.

To me that (trusting what the machine tells me, and enjoying the machine) is very important. I’m not discounting other aspects (such as a specific machine’s abilities in certain circumstances) but I do believe that the most capable machine won’t do me a bit of good if I don’t enjoy using it or don’t understand what it is telling me.

The bulk of my hunting is in trashy areas (everything from modern to bits/pieces of iron) - mostly locations with several hundred years of activity. I mostly hunt for coins - the older the better. Mostly I hunt soil that is fairly mild. I place more value on separation (unmasking) than I do on depth. I tend to hunt the same locations time and time again; going over areas from different directions, using different coils, different machines, and different frequencies. I am a very slow and methodical hunter.

I have re-hunted areas with machines that most would consider more entry level (after hunting with machines that would be considered more upper-level) and found good targets. I’ve also experienced the reverse.

I chalk that up to getting the coil over the target and being curious enough to dig the target. The hunter is the same, although I admit to having varying degrees of understanding when it comes to the different machines I’ve used. If anything, I think the weak link is almost always me (the hunter).

In some situations I think SMF offers a significant benefit. In some situations I think SMF has a negligible impact, and in some situations I think SMF is likely a bit of a hindrance. I do find selectable frequencies to be beneficial for the type of hunting that I mostly engage in.

As Carl noted, there’s a bit of hype with all metal detectors. I can’t prove my beliefs to be true, but as far as I’m concerned that doesn’t actually matter. I think a good deal of the success that one has with a metal detector stems from believing in the machine being used and trusting what it is telling me.

In short - if I believe in the machine used and I understand what that machine is telling me: my chances of success are greatly increased. Even if the machine I’m using isn’t (supposedly) as capable as a different machine might be.
As to whether a SMF machine offers you an advantage over the machines you currently own:

Maybe.

It all depends on your conditions, what you’re hunting for, and how well you gel with the new machine.

For the type of hunting I do (and with the conditions I have) the truth is that a SMF machine probably isn’t much of an advantage - short of any perceived value that positively impacts my trust in the machine.

That’s my take.

I’ve been wrong before; according to my wife, quite frequently.

 

[dfmike]

I just want to know why and would it be to my advantage to purchase one.

I fear nobody could ever give you a satisfying answer. There's theory however sound and then there's practice in the field in the areas where YOU like to detect for whatever objects you desire (not air tests). I was asking myself the same question as you not too long ago and got more confused with the answers I was getting. Ultimately I only had two choices: Keep the single frequency detectors I have and be happy with that choice or try an Equinox (or other simultaneous freq detector) and see for myself what the buzz is about (if there is indeed a buzz). Not everyone wants to spend to "try" but it's the only way to get a definitive answer for yourself. If you are lucky enough to be able to borrow one from a friend for a few weekends, do it ! Zero expense and you will have your answer.

 

[Carl-NC]

Thank you, Monte. I may know how to design 'em, but you have far more expertise when it comes to using 'em. I tip my hat to you!

 

[Picketwire]

Picket, I design metal detectors (FTP).

Thank you very much Carl! I do appreciate it. I was hoping you would comment and you even answered questions that I was afraid to ask.

 

[Silver Saver]

I was going to PM you the "Minelab Equinox Owners-Question" but it seems you did good finding it on your own. As far as technical information, I haven't seen a better or more informative thread than that one.

 

[targits]

the new new minelab will be ok for me

 

[calabash digger]

Here is the lowdown on Multi .....

 

[david bull]

Picket, I design metal detectors (FTP). Depending on how well its done, MF will have a number of advantages over SF. The first & most obvious is salt cancel. MF can work right into the surf where SF will give you fits. In the desert this will help with alkali soil after a rain. Practically all MF designs I've tried do a good job at salt cancel.
Second, MF processes more information about the target and can potentially give better target ID, or perhaps do a better job with iron ID. Same with the ground signal, and can potentially do a better job at ground balancing. "Potentially" is key here. The Fisher CZs were notorious for mis-identifying deep iron. The White's V3 had ground balance problems.
Regardless of the design, MF spreads the transmit power amongst 2 or more frequencies which means that each TX frequency cannot be as strong as a same SF detector. So a potential drawback is a compromise in depth. As an example, the V3 will hit silver targets deeper in 2.5kHz-only mode and small gold deeper in 22.5kHz-only mode than it does in MF mode. The Minelab BBS/FBS are renowned for hitting deep silver but that's because they primarily transmit 3.125kHz; the 25kHz TX frequency is relatively weak and so is their response to small gold.
Bottom line is that all detectors come with a dose of hype and you should buy the detector for the job at hand. If I were hunting a trashy beach then MF, no doubt. If I'm hunting fairly clean beaches I would probably use a PI. If I'm nugget hunting then either a high-freq SF or a PI, depending on ground conditions and nugget size. If I'm coin hunting then a MF might be the ticket, but a good SF will also work well. If there is a lot of trash then I will focus more on response speed and audio qualities more than whether it SF or MF. And so on.

This might explain an experience that I had with my Etrac a few years ago. I had discovered a Union campsite and worked it heavily for the best part of a summer.My Etrac started acting up at a another site and I elected to send it in while it was still under warranty.While it was gone I picked up a White’s M-6 for a couple hundred bucks and went back over my campsite.The first day out I dug 8-10 three ringers at 8 inches, far deeper than the Etrac had ever hit targets.In the Etrac’s defense,it did find several silver coins in a hunted out park….

 

[autopilot42]

Picket, I design metal detectors (FTP). Depending on how well its done, MF will have a number of advantages over SF. The first & most obvious is salt cancel. MF can work right into the surf where SF will give you fits. In the desert this will help with alkali soil after a rain. Practically all MF designs I've tried do a good job at salt cancel.
Second, MF processes more information about the target and can potentially give better target ID, or perhaps do a better job with iron ID. Same with the ground signal, and can potentially do a better job at ground balancing. "Potentially" is key here. The Fisher CZs were notorious for mis-identifying deep iron. The White's V3 had ground balance problems.
Regardless of the design, MF spreads the transmit power amongst 2 or more frequencies which means that each TX frequency cannot be as strong as a same SF detector. So a potential drawback is a compromise in depth. As an example, the V3 will hit silver targets deeper in 2.5kHz-only mode and small gold deeper in 22.5kHz-only mode than it does in MF mode. The Minelab BBS/FBS are renowned for hitting deep silver but that's because they primarily transmit 3.125kHz; the 25kHz TX frequency is relatively weak and so is their response to small gold.
Bottom line is that all detectors come with a dose of hype and you should buy the detector for the job at hand. If I were hunting a trashy beach then MF, no doubt. If I'm hunting fairly clean beaches I would probably use a PI. If I'm nugget hunting then either a high-freq SF or a PI, depending on ground conditions and nugget size. If I'm coin hunting then a MF might be the ticket, but a good SF will also work well. If there is a lot of trash then I will focus more on response speed and audio qualities more than whether it SF or MF. And so on.

 

[autopilot42]

Thank you Carl for the f point really nice pinpointer. My favorite.