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.
Why Analog??
- Thread starter landman
- Start date
Why Analog over Digital ?
As somebody pointed out above, I guess you have to decide at what point does a detector step from Analog to Digital? Is it when a microprocessor is managing the detectors input and output? That might be a good point.
Regardless, there are some pretty good older detectors out there that are completely capable of finding good stuff at good depths. In example, for years I've hunted with a friend that uses a White's 6000 Di Pro SL, a detector I would classify as an Analog detector. I've been using an Explorer XS, definitely a Digital detector. We often hunt private yards together and split the yard in half, usually with the front walkway as the dividing line. When hunting private yards, our rule is that whoever acquired permission to hunt picks which side of the yard to hunt first. The two of us begin hunting and by the time I am between 1/3 and 1/2 way done on my side, my friend will be completely done with his side and ready to follow behind me.
I don't recall a single instance that I have finished first.
My friend is very accomplished with his detector and will find targets that I have missed due to one reason or another. Ditto for me. I will find targets he has missed, generally deeper or adjacent to iron trash.
He feels like I have a more capable detector than he does, but I have to hunt very slowly to take advantage of my Explorer's ability. On the other side of that coin, he can cover an area much faster than I and with his concentric coil can pinpoint so quickly and exactly it is scary. So he is able to get all of the easy stuff, down to about 8" deep, from more area much faster than I can. His detector is more time efficient than mine. So which is more advantageous? Well, for the areas we hunt, it seems that the advantage more often depends on which side of the yard is picked. Between the two of us overlapping each others efforts, we cover an area pretty thoroughly.
If you take a look at the finds posted on the various forums, you will notice that for the most part, the majority of hunters are re-hunting areas they and everybody else have hunted in the past; sometimes for the umpteenth time. The detectors used in these places originally were our detectors of the past, all the old Whites, Garrett's, Fishers, Teknetics, Wilson's, Tesoros, Compass', Nautilus', and so forth. It order to continue to find good targets in these hunted out areas you either have to cover the area more efficiently with the same same technology or change the technology to take advantage of something the previous detectors couldn't do.
So now we have detectors that have excellent target separation abilities with improved recovery times coupled with the genius of a bunch of different ways to have the microprocessor analyze the return signal and discriminate based on some intricate methods of target identification. To make everything more fun, the operator has dozens (actually if you count up all the possible setting combinations it would be thousands) of ways they can tweak the processor to change the way it processes the return signal and the way the computer communicates with the operator both visually and audibly.
So how does one of us come up with the optimal settings for our computerized digital detecting machines?
I don't know that we ever do. Most don't have the time or the patience to experiment at length with these digital wonders and therefore rely upon others for their base settings; whether from a supplemental advanced book of some sort or one of the detector specific forums like findmall.
Is there any real difference between having a detector where the experts at the factory preset the majority of the settings vs having somebody advise you from a book or a forum on what your settings should be? Well, I guess that having the settings accessible with the computerized detector is the advantage. Settings can be easily changed if there is a problem.
So in the end, we have two different styles of detectors. One group specifically designed to clean up whatever is leftover by the others. Are these computerized wonders better in every way than their counterparts? I don't think so. And I think the older detectors with fewer settings allow the average operator to become much more expert at what that detector is telling them than the new detectors do. IMHO
Whatever type of detector you decide to use, make sure that you use it. After all, if you're sitting home studying a How-To guide on your detector or reading online where everybody else has been or what they've found, you've not Gone Beepin'.................
Rich (Utah)
As somebody pointed out above, I guess you have to decide at what point does a detector step from Analog to Digital? Is it when a microprocessor is managing the detectors input and output? That might be a good point.
Regardless, there are some pretty good older detectors out there that are completely capable of finding good stuff at good depths. In example, for years I've hunted with a friend that uses a White's 6000 Di Pro SL, a detector I would classify as an Analog detector. I've been using an Explorer XS, definitely a Digital detector. We often hunt private yards together and split the yard in half, usually with the front walkway as the dividing line. When hunting private yards, our rule is that whoever acquired permission to hunt picks which side of the yard to hunt first. The two of us begin hunting and by the time I am between 1/3 and 1/2 way done on my side, my friend will be completely done with his side and ready to follow behind me.
I don't recall a single instance that I have finished first.
My friend is very accomplished with his detector and will find targets that I have missed due to one reason or another. Ditto for me. I will find targets he has missed, generally deeper or adjacent to iron trash.He feels like I have a more capable detector than he does, but I have to hunt very slowly to take advantage of my Explorer's ability. On the other side of that coin, he can cover an area much faster than I and with his concentric coil can pinpoint so quickly and exactly it is scary. So he is able to get all of the easy stuff, down to about 8" deep, from more area much faster than I can. His detector is more time efficient than mine. So which is more advantageous? Well, for the areas we hunt, it seems that the advantage more often depends on which side of the yard is picked. Between the two of us overlapping each others efforts, we cover an area pretty thoroughly.
If you take a look at the finds posted on the various forums, you will notice that for the most part, the majority of hunters are re-hunting areas they and everybody else have hunted in the past; sometimes for the umpteenth time. The detectors used in these places originally were our detectors of the past, all the old Whites, Garrett's, Fishers, Teknetics, Wilson's, Tesoros, Compass', Nautilus', and so forth. It order to continue to find good targets in these hunted out areas you either have to cover the area more efficiently with the same same technology or change the technology to take advantage of something the previous detectors couldn't do.
So now we have detectors that have excellent target separation abilities with improved recovery times coupled with the genius of a bunch of different ways to have the microprocessor analyze the return signal and discriminate based on some intricate methods of target identification. To make everything more fun, the operator has dozens (actually if you count up all the possible setting combinations it would be thousands) of ways they can tweak the processor to change the way it processes the return signal and the way the computer communicates with the operator both visually and audibly.
So how does one of us come up with the optimal settings for our computerized digital detecting machines?
I don't know that we ever do. Most don't have the time or the patience to experiment at length with these digital wonders and therefore rely upon others for their base settings; whether from a supplemental advanced book of some sort or one of the detector specific forums like findmall.Is there any real difference between having a detector where the experts at the factory preset the majority of the settings vs having somebody advise you from a book or a forum on what your settings should be? Well, I guess that having the settings accessible with the computerized detector is the advantage. Settings can be easily changed if there is a problem.
So in the end, we have two different styles of detectors. One group specifically designed to clean up whatever is leftover by the others. Are these computerized wonders better in every way than their counterparts? I don't think so. And I think the older detectors with fewer settings allow the average operator to become much more expert at what that detector is telling them than the new detectors do. IMHO
Whatever type of detector you decide to use, make sure that you use it. After all, if you're sitting home studying a How-To guide on your detector or reading online where everybody else has been or what they've found, you've not Gone Beepin'.................
Rich (Utah)
I do not mind the so called digitally controled metal detectors but I dislike the digital readouts.
Give me an analogue moving coil meter any day because they are simpler and easier to read plus for discrimination displays they can take up infinite positions on the dial.
many of todays digital display metal detectors have far to much info which in the end supplies no more realy useful information than an analogue meter, and that is signal strength, target depth, target pinpoint and target identity, very little else is required. The analogue meter pointer takes up a position on the dial that is instantly translated by the operator to good target or bad target but with a digital meter you have to process a lot more information in order to decide if your target is good or bad (translate numbers to target type, Conductivity readings etc)) which takes more time and is longer to learn.
I have used a great many detectors during 47 yrs detecting and the only partially digital detector that I have found to be very easy to use is my SOV XS and I guess the only thing digital about this machine is the readout but even then I tend to rely more on the tones from this machine than the readout because it can jump around too much at times and can be so quick that I cannot tell if the readings are jumping up or going down but with an analogue meter very subtle movements of the meter can be easily seen and instantly tell you a lot about your possible target type.
Digital or Analogue? I have not found any significant difference in either ones abillity to get into the ground and as a matter of fact my deepest detecting machine is my 6000DI PRO SL which kills every machine I have owned for depth in any ground it can be Ground Balanced in and that is a lot of ground.
It won't beat my SOV in wet salt sand but it sure as heck does a pretty good job when set up right.
after having said all of this I will admit that there are some pretty nifty digital machines around today, but I will always prefer analogue Readout.
Give me an analogue moving coil meter any day because they are simpler and easier to read plus for discrimination displays they can take up infinite positions on the dial.
many of todays digital display metal detectors have far to much info which in the end supplies no more realy useful information than an analogue meter, and that is signal strength, target depth, target pinpoint and target identity, very little else is required. The analogue meter pointer takes up a position on the dial that is instantly translated by the operator to good target or bad target but with a digital meter you have to process a lot more information in order to decide if your target is good or bad (translate numbers to target type, Conductivity readings etc)) which takes more time and is longer to learn.
I have used a great many detectors during 47 yrs detecting and the only partially digital detector that I have found to be very easy to use is my SOV XS and I guess the only thing digital about this machine is the readout but even then I tend to rely more on the tones from this machine than the readout because it can jump around too much at times and can be so quick that I cannot tell if the readings are jumping up or going down but with an analogue meter very subtle movements of the meter can be easily seen and instantly tell you a lot about your possible target type.
Digital or Analogue? I have not found any significant difference in either ones abillity to get into the ground and as a matter of fact my deepest detecting machine is my 6000DI PRO SL which kills every machine I have owned for depth in any ground it can be Ground Balanced in and that is a lot of ground.
It won't beat my SOV in wet salt sand but it sure as heck does a pretty good job when set up right.
after having said all of this I will admit that there are some pretty nifty digital machines around today, but I will always prefer analogue Readout.
I agree with the opinon on the White's 6000 XL Pro - it can be calibrated to minute precision and out perform many of the current generation detectors regardless of brand or mfg. I bought many different types but I keep coming back to the old work horse as it really meets and exceeds my expectations.
As analog? Sure there is. To the question of CMOS--some ICs are digital, but CMOS is inherently analog technology. I would imagine that most new detectors still use analog input/output on the coil, but I haven't looked at the diagrams yet. Do they also use a variable tone? That would be analog. I am all for digital and it can compute the signals and analyze things through its programming. I worked with oil well formation analysis instruments in the '70s and human analog and digital imaging. (biomedical/x-ray) -- Can't wait to get into metal detecting.
For me, its a couple of simple reasons. With the analog machines I've used, you get 1) an audio indication of relative depth with a weaker sound the deeper the signal, (the digital machines I've used do not change pitch according to depth), 2) On an analog machine you can get "whisper" signals that are on the edge of the machines capability and usually indicate depth (digital machines are either on with a clear signal or no signal). 3) The analog machines I've used had a better build quality and could stand up to a little abuse. The digital machines I've used in the last year (don't want to offend sponsors so no specifics here) are cheaply built and the manufacturers know it (why else are the warranties no longer transferrable? A warranty is a warranty and should be good for the period stated, no matter who owns the machine).
[/I've been detecting since 1979 mainly for coins. I've owned many Whites, a Minelab and many Fisher's(late models). A current progress report so far this early season. Week one.
I sold my detectors and what remains is a Hipmount Version of a Whites 6000D Series2 that hung in my closet in the bag for 15 yrs. I forgot I had it, was a coin killer when I used it in the 80's.
So out it came, cleaned it up added batteries and out I went to my proving ground park where I've taken all new detectors........and the small Park has been pounded by everyone within 50 miles
of my small town. It hasn't provided much just modern stuff.
The 6000D S2 was amazing within a half hour and 30 ft later I had 3 Wheats, 1 Mec,, 1 EF Barber Dime and 1 Indianhead. It was magical.......short of amazing!! My 6000D certainly is
magical and I don't understand why. However the 6000D S2 is different than than later version White's. That is the last Audio is analog, a mellow and clean as the later White's were more
processed or artificial. I can hear subtle changes on the signal that no other detector provide. The 6000d S2 requires ones brain and ears to judge a target merits. Don't need Auto SAT, ID or
a larger loop. Buying and throwing big money at finding more is proven here and none of the other detectors obviously couldn't match it. Simpler is best.
The 6000DH S2 when it hits a good target the Detector Sounds " Coooooiiiiiiig........ like Coin and is softer when it's a deeper target........the Audio says everything!!
Best Bill
b]
I sold my detectors and what remains is a Hipmount Version of a Whites 6000D Series2 that hung in my closet in the bag for 15 yrs. I forgot I had it, was a coin killer when I used it in the 80's.
So out it came, cleaned it up added batteries and out I went to my proving ground park where I've taken all new detectors........and the small Park has been pounded by everyone within 50 miles
of my small town. It hasn't provided much just modern stuff.
The 6000D S2 was amazing within a half hour and 30 ft later I had 3 Wheats, 1 Mec,, 1 EF Barber Dime and 1 Indianhead. It was magical.......short of amazing!! My 6000D certainly is
magical and I don't understand why. However the 6000D S2 is different than than later version White's. That is the last Audio is analog, a mellow and clean as the later White's were more
processed or artificial. I can hear subtle changes on the signal that no other detector provide. The 6000d S2 requires ones brain and ears to judge a target merits. Don't need Auto SAT, ID or
a larger loop. Buying and throwing big money at finding more is proven here and none of the other detectors obviously couldn't match it. Simpler is best.
The 6000DH S2 when it hits a good target the Detector Sounds " Coooooiiiiiiig........ like Coin and is softer when it's a deeper target........the Audio says everything!!
Best Bill
b]
Stormrider51
New member
I'm new to the forum but I started metal detecting with a Garrett BFO along about 1973. I stuck mostly with Garrett's with a few White's thrown in and a single Compass since that time. I've always said that metal detecting was the only hobby I ever had that paid for itself. The old machines forced me to learn how to ground balance the detector. Then I would set the discrimination to eliminate bottle caps and nails. The loudness of the sound would give me a good idea of target depth before I looked at the meter. The old Garrett's with the "belltone" practically guaranteed that the target was worth digging. Mostly I just dug every target that might be good. I dug a lot of trash but I found a lot of keepers too.
As technology advanced I kept up. Although I would wander away for periods of time and do other things, I always wandered back. The digital readout machines became the thing to have. Programs for just about anything. Press a button or two and start sweeping. Forget all those minute adjustments and knobs. Life was easier. Or was it? The machine often seemed to be confused about what was down there with the digital readout jumping all over the place. The tones were all the same so I had to squint eyes that aren't what they used to be in an attempt to learn the predicted depth and target ID. I eventually noticed that while I dug less trash I was also digging fewer rings and nickles, targets that I always loved to find, so I started digging almost every target that even might be good. I was back where I had been before the computers took over.
I should probably confess right now that I shoot a flintlock rifle, own a sailboat instead of a powerboat, and think real airplanes have propellers. Sort of warns you about my mindset, doesn't it? I currently have my eye on a Garrett Master Hunter ADS III detector in fine condition. If I manage to work a deal on it my current digital wonder will be passed along to my wife who has recently show in interest in the hobby. I'm willing to bet I'll find just as much good stuff plus I'll enjoy it more because the brain that does the interpretation of signals is mine. Enjoyment is what this hobby is all about.
John
As technology advanced I kept up. Although I would wander away for periods of time and do other things, I always wandered back. The digital readout machines became the thing to have. Programs for just about anything. Press a button or two and start sweeping. Forget all those minute adjustments and knobs. Life was easier. Or was it? The machine often seemed to be confused about what was down there with the digital readout jumping all over the place. The tones were all the same so I had to squint eyes that aren't what they used to be in an attempt to learn the predicted depth and target ID. I eventually noticed that while I dug less trash I was also digging fewer rings and nickles, targets that I always loved to find, so I started digging almost every target that even might be good. I was back where I had been before the computers took over.
I should probably confess right now that I shoot a flintlock rifle, own a sailboat instead of a powerboat, and think real airplanes have propellers. Sort of warns you about my mindset, doesn't it? I currently have my eye on a Garrett Master Hunter ADS III detector in fine condition. If I manage to work a deal on it my current digital wonder will be passed along to my wife who has recently show in interest in the hobby. I'm willing to bet I'll find just as much good stuff plus I'll enjoy it more because the brain that does the interpretation of signals is mine. Enjoyment is what this hobby is all about.
John