Here's the new Minelab Equinox

You have right... hahahah. But in my opinion this is not final product yet. Time is priceless.

Shelton could you please put a link to your YouTube video you did testing the Equinox at Detectival thanks.

[www.youtube.com]

I must say that video will not make me sell my CTX lol. Thanks Shelton for making it. And the fact that I understand Polish made it even more enjoyable. You made me smirk a little. Thanks for the honest quick review. I am very disappointed that the machine could not hit the targets that are in the test garden.

Is no one at all finding the amount of EMI/crosstalk that must have been present there a major concern, with so many machines running in such close proximity? Should that not render any conclusions about detector performance tenuous, at best?

I can't stand within 10 feet of someone running another machine, without major interference/loss of performance...

Steve



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2017 03:22AM by steveg.

Especially when there are other identical brand/model like-item..... being run next to it/you. (A few Equinox's being run next to each other.)

You have subtitles with movie. I was try to noise cancel few time and sensitivity down, it was always the same.

As a beach hunter Tom brought up a good point to me........... lets wait and see what Fisher offers us. Im going to see what BOTH offer. If its a PI with a usable disc....... thats a money maker for me. Im excited about the possible use of this machine......but i noticed no CTX connector..... and just a question, why are they still using external speaker on a water machine especially?

I wouldn’t even turn my machine on if it threw such a tantrum.

A lot of speculation going on, a lot of people who don’t have any confidence in the brand.
These guys make detectors who can smell a mosquitof@rt at 200 yards.
Even the Go-Fling it in a ditch had for a childs toy very reasonable performance,... you don’t want your kids digging tunnels at the beach!

So I’m on the list. No need to hurry Mr Minelab. Your current offerings are more than up to the job.
A little more wires, a little or a lot heavy, few leaking gaskets an oddity here and there. But they get the job done admirably.

Do we need the Equinox. No we don’t.
Can we do without it once we had it in our paws. Time will tell.

Certainly looks neat doesn’t it!!!

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is no one at all finding the amount of EMI/crossta
> lk that must have been present there a major conce
> rn, with so many machines running in such close pr
> oximity? Should that not render any conclusions a
> bout detector performance tenuous, at best?
>
> I can't stand within 10 feet of someone running an
> other machine, without major interference/loss of
> performance...
>
> Steve

HH
Johnb

More info

Dang! The photo is cut off on the most important part in the bottom right corner..
Thanks for the info anyway..

Bryan

((( Why must so many people start their very own thread on the Equinox??? What happened to source consolidation? )))

The article (in the cut-off portion on the right side) suggests, not surprisingly, that "Multi-IQ" multi-frequency will be utilizing a combination of frequencies that lean toward the higher end, overall, as compared to FBS/BBS, and as such, will be more "tuned" to low conductors (high-frequency targets) vs. high conductors (low-frequency targets). I am not surprised, but a bit disappointed, as a coin hunter. I know that this was not designed with a focus on being a coin machine (that's more of the CTX's focus), but still, I was hoping this new multi-frequency tech they are calling Mulit-IQ would be equally adept at both. They specifically state that it will be "slightly less sensitive" to high conductors, such that "BBS/FBS will still have an advantage for finding high-conductive silver coins.

This will probably please many, but I was hoping for different...

I sure do wish I knew if there would be an Equinox-like machine coming down the pike using this Multi-IQ technology -- but tuned toward LOWER frequency, making it more high-conductor oriented...kind of back to that "Equinox 1000" model I joked in another thread that I'm hoping for...

Steve

Steve In practice I think you may be surprised if this new Multi-IQ technology leverages HF vs LF as it will be able to better unmask, get through iron, and of course ground minerals.

Interesting, so if you take a CTX with the same coil (size) as the NOX, and the NOX8 out to your favorite deep turf site, first running the CTX to hoover up all the silver, what will the NOX8 find that the CTX missed?

I like that they state the main advantages of the Multi-IQ are:

[*] Increased target ID accuracy
[*] Reduced noise levels for all ground types
[*] Faster recovery speed

I would say that the next model upgrade should allow the user to select what frequencies are utilized in simultaneous multi-frequency operation. I think the White's V3i could do that, is it currently the only machine that can select what simultaneous multi-frequencies are used?



steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The article (in the cut-off portion on the right s
> ide) suggests, not surprisingly, that "Multi-IQ" m
> ulti-frequency will be utilizing a combination of
> frequencies that lean toward the higher end, overa
> ll, as compared to FBS/BBS, and as such, will be m
> ore "tuned" to low conductors (high-frequency targ
> ets) vs. high conductors (low-frequency targets).
> I am not surprised, but a bit disappointed, as a c
> oin hunter. I know that this was not designed wit
> h a focus on being a coin machine (that's more of
> the CTX's focus), but still, I was hoping this new
> multi-frequency tech they are calling Mulit-IQ wou
> ld be equally adept at both. They specifically st
> ate that it will be "slightly less sensitive" to h
> igh conductors, such that "BBS/FBS will still have
> an advantage for finding high-conductive silver co
> ins.
>
> This will probably please many, but I was hoping f
> or different...
>
> I sure do wish I knew if there would be an Equinox
> -like machine coming down the pike using this Mult
> i-IQ technology -- but tuned toward LOWER frequenc
> y, making it more high-conductor oriented...kind o
> f back to that "Equinox 1000" model I joked in ano
> ther thread that I'm hoping for...
>
> Steve

Am I reading correctly, Equinox as stable vs bbs/fbs in salt water??

That sounds real good to me.
Beach hunters will enjoy if this is so.

More nicer lower conductors on a beach than high conductors anyway.

And freq in itself treads on recovery speed.
Meaning just fast could a CTX be made electronically?
There are limits.

Cal_cobra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Steve In practice I think you may be surprised if
> this new Multi-IQ technology leverages HF vs LF as
> it will be able to better unmask, get through iron
> , and of course ground minerals.
>
> Interesting, so if you take a CTX with the same co
> il (size) as the NOX, and the NOX8 out to your fav
> orite deep turf site, first running the CTX to hoo
> ver up all the silver, what will the NOX8 find tha
> t the CTX missed?
>
> I like that they state the main advantages of the
> Multi-IQ are:
>
>

> [*] Increased target ID accuracy
> [*] Reduced noise levels for all ground types[/
> b]
> [*] Faster recovery speed
>

>
> I would say that the next model upgrade should all
> ow the user to select what frequencies are utilize
> d in simultaneous multi-frequency operation. I t
> hink the White's V3i could do that, is it currentl
> y the only machine that can select what simultaneo
> us multi-frequencies are used?
>
>
>
> steveg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The article (in the cut-off portion on the right
> s
> > ide) suggests, not surprisingly, that "Multi-IQ"
> m
> > ulti-frequency will be utilizing a combination o
> f
> > frequencies that lean toward the higher end, ove
> ra
> > ll, as compared to FBS/BBS, and as such, will be
> m
> > ore "tuned" to low conductors (high-frequency ta
> rg
> > ets) vs. high conductors (low-frequency targets)
> .
> > I am not surprised, but a bit disappointed, as a
> c
> > oin hunter. I know that this was not designed w
> it
> > h a focus on being a coin machine (that's more o
> f
> > the CTX's focus), but still, I was hoping this n
> ew
> > multi-frequency tech they are calling Mulit-IQ w
> ou
> > ld be equally adept at both. They specifically
> st
> > ate that it will be "slightly less sensitive" to
> h
> > igh conductors, such that "BBS/FBS will still ha
> ve
> > an advantage for finding high-conductive silver
> co
> > ins.
> >
> > This will probably please many, but I was hoping
> f
> > or different...
> >
> > I sure do wish I knew if there would be an Equin
> ox
> > -like machine coming down the pike using this Mu
> lt
> > i-IQ technology -- but tuned toward LOWER freque
> nc
> > y, making it more high-conductor oriented...kind
> o
> > f back to that "Equinox 1000" model I joked in a
> no
> > ther thread that I'm hoping for...
> >
> > Steve

Hmm. Good points made there, Cal_cobra. Can't argue with you.

I guess what I was hoping for would be a machine capable of both. Let THIS machine "Hoover up the silver," by switching it to a "park hunting multi-frequency mode," i.e. a "tuned to deep silver, lower grouping of frequencies" mode, and then, afterward, SWITCH IT to a "hunting in iron trash" mode, a faster mode with either a high single frequency, or grouping of higher multi-frequencies, for better iron/adjacent target separation like what you described (that could then tease out even MORE previously missed finds). In other words, instead of taking an FBS machine AND an Equinox with me, give me the ability to JUST take the Equinox. Sort of like you alluded to in the "next" model of the Equinox (possibly allowing a SELECTABLE grouping of multi-frequencies).

Bottom line is this, as we all know...if you are a coin hunter who hunts a lot of public spots, there are largely two types of targets left to be found. Targets missed by prior detectorists due to being TOO DEEP to be recovered easily, and targets missed by prior detectorists due to being too MASKED by adjacent trash/iron to be recovered easily. I would love to see a machine designed specifically to excel at BOTH -- as DEEP as it can be with as ACCURATE a target ID system as possible, in "mode A," and then offer state-of-the-art unmasking of partially masked targets, in "mode B."

But, in the mean time, I guess I need to let the Equinox get out to the dealers and into our hands, and let's see what IT can do...

Steve

The ML guy (in the kilt) did say something to the effect that the different search modes were individually frequency tuned, so perhaps it will do that, say use 5-10-15 for parks, and 15-20-40 for gold or beach hunting, etc., that would be slick.

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cal_cobra Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Steve In practice I think you may be surprised i
> f
> > this new Multi-IQ technology leverages HF vs LF
> as
> > it will be able to better unmask, get through ir
> on
> > , and of course ground minerals.
> >
> > Interesting, so if you take a CTX with the same
> co
> > il (size) as the NOX, and the NOX8 out to your f
> av
> > orite deep turf site, first running the CTX to h
> oo
> > ver up all the silver, what will the NOX8 find t
> ha
> > t the CTX missed?
> >
> > I like that they state the main advantages of th
> e
> > Multi-IQ are:
> >
> >

> > [*] Increased target ID accuracy
> > [*] Reduced noise levels for all ground types
> [/
> > b]
> > [*] Faster recovery speed
> >

> >
> > I would say that the next model upgrade should a
> ll
> > ow the user to select what frequencies are utili
> ze
> > d in simultaneous multi-frequency operation. I
> t
> > hink the White's V3i could do that, is it curren
> tl
> > y the only machine that can select what simultan
> eo
> > us multi-frequencies are used?
> >
> >
> >
> > steveg Wrote:
> > ------------------------------------------------
> --
> > -----
> > > The article (in the cut-off portion on the rig
> ht
> > s
> > > ide) suggests, not surprisingly, that "Multi-I
> Q"
> > m
> > > ulti-frequency will be utilizing a combination
> o
> > f
> > > frequencies that lean toward the higher end, o
> ve
> > ra
> > > ll, as compared to FBS/BBS, and as such, will
> be
> > m
> > > ore "tuned" to low conductors (high-frequency
> ta
> > rg
> > > ets) vs. high conductors (low-frequency target
> s)
> > .
> > > I am not surprised, but a bit disappointed, as
> a
> > c
> > > oin hunter. I know that this was not designed
> w
> > it
> > > h a focus on being a coin machine (that's more
> o
> > f
> > > the CTX's focus), but still, I was hoping this
> n
> > ew
> > > multi-frequency tech they are calling Mulit-IQ
> w
> > ou
> > > ld be equally adept at both. They specificall
> y
> > st
> > > ate that it will be "slightly less sensitive"
> to
> > h
> > > igh conductors, such that "BBS/FBS will still
> ha
> > ve
> > > an advantage for finding high-conductive silve
> r
> > co
> > > ins.
> > >
> > > This will probably please many, but I was hopi
> ng
> > f
> > > or different...
> > >
> > > I sure do wish I knew if there would be an Equ
> in
> > ox
> > > -like machine coming down the pike using this
> Mu
> > lt
> > > i-IQ technology -- but tuned toward LOWER freq
> ue
> > nc
> > > y, making it more high-conductor oriented...ki
> nd
> > o
> > > f back to that "Equinox 1000" model I joked in
> a
> > no
> > > ther thread that I'm hoping for...
> > >
> > > Steve
>
> Hmm. Good points made there, Cal_cobra. Can't ar
> gue with you.
>
> I guess what I was hoping for would be a machine c
> apable of both. Let THIS machine "Hoover up the s
> ilver," by switching it to a "park hunting multi-f
> requency mode," i.e. a "tuned to deep silver, lowe
> r grouping of frequencies" mode, and then, afterwa
> rd, SWITCH IT to a "hunting in iron trash" mode, a
> faster mode with either a high single frequency, o
> r grouping of higher multi-frequencies, for better
> iron/adjacent target separation like what you desc
> ribed (that could then tease out even MORE previou
> sly missed finds). In other words, instead of tak
> ing an FBS machine AND an Equinox with me, give me
> the ability to JUST take the Equinox. Sort of lik
> e you alluded to in the "next" model of the Equino
> x (possibly allowing a SELECTABLE grouping of mult
> i-frequencies).
>
> Bottom line is this, as we all know...if you are a
> coin hunter who hunts a lot of public spots, there
> are largely two types of targets left to be found.
> Targets missed by prior detectorists due to being
> TOO DEEP to be recovered easily, and targets misse
> d by prior detectorists due to being too MASKED by
> adjacent trash/iron to be recovered easily. I wou
> ld love to see a machine designed specifically to
> excel at BOTH -- as DEEP as it can be with as ACCU
> RATE a target ID system as possible, in "mode A,"
> and then offer state-of-the-art unmasking of parti
> ally masked targets, in "mode B."
>
> But, in the mean time, I guess I need to let the E
> quinox get out to the dealers and into our hands,
> and let's see what IT can do...
>
> Steve

True, Cal_cobra. That was said. Here's to hoping (can't wait for these things to hit the streets and be put through the paces -- and then reported on -- by some people we trust...)

Steve



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/26/2017 04:48AM by steveg.

If the differences are only what is listed the 600 sounds like a great deal for us park/coin xterra peeps.

detectingMO -- I think there are other differences...

I heard it alluded to something about "ability to do some customization of modes," or creation of different "modes" than the four canned modes, something like that, that would be more "robust" in the 800 vs. the 600. In other words, a more "expert" user might have more ability to tweak settings an modes in the 800 vs. the 600. I can't remember the exact words, but something to that effect. May or may not prove to be important to many, but I think that is another "difference" of sorts between the two. In any case, I think the 600 will be a great deal for many...

Steve

Sod-buster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Am I reading correctly, Equinox as stable vs bbs/f
> bs in salt water??
>
> That sounds real good to me.
> Beach hunters will enjoy if this is so.
>
> More nicer lower conductors on a beach than high c
> onductors anyway.
>
> And freq in itself treads on recovery speed.
> Meaning just fast could a CTX be made electronical
> ly?
> There are limits.

Could very well put the Excal in the shed for beach /water hunting.

"however BBS/FBS still have an advantage for finding high conductive coins"

Bet they dumbed it down so it would not compete, can't have that!

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
In a democracy, it is difficult to win fellow citizens over to your own side, or to build public support to remedy injustices that remain all too real when you fundamentally misunderstand how they see the world.

detectingMO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If the differences are only what is listed the 600
> sounds like a great deal for us park/coin xterra p
> eeps.

I'm waiting to see what the 600 loses as far as expert settings. However, $250.00 for the higher freq's, advanced expert settings and WM8 module is fair.

If the 600 has the reactivity settings it could cover a lot of needs since they have the same multi-freq modes anyway (3:18 in the video). It would have been nice if the 600 had the 20Khz freq but feel that was done to help push sales to the 800 which was a smart marketing move.

Mark Lawrie Equinox


Tom

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
In a democracy, it is difficult to win fellow citizens over to your own side, or to build public support to remedy injustices that remain all too real when you fundamentally misunderstand how they see the world.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/26/2017 11:09AM by Jackpine.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ((( Why must so many people start their very own t
> hread on the Equinox??? What happened to source
> consolidation? )))

NASA-Tom,

I wanted to respectfully offer you a possible answer to your question. On many forums, there is an "etiquette" (as you probably know) about "not threadjacking." In other words, I think long-time forum users have kind of learned that it is "bad manners" to take someone's thread topic, and veer it off on some branch that is only tangentially related to the original poster's topic. So, if you have something to say that is "tangential," in any way, many of us have sort have "acquired" the tendency that the "courteous" thing to do is start a new thread (so as not to "threadjack).

Here, I know it's a little different and unique at times, in that you like things that are even tangential to a particular topic, or machine, or platform, to be kept in one thread as much as possible, so as to allow future users to be able to have a "one-stop shop" as to where to find info. The "Rcpt Ack. F75" thread, for instance, has been going on for EVER, where as on any other forums it would be considered "in poor taste" to "dredge up" an "old thread" to post new info in it. So, I think maybe your question (frustration?) is related to this "online etiquette" thing, where people -- especially newer posters -- are used to the "etiquette" at other forums, and don't yet perceive that things here may be done just a little differently at times. I understand both points of view, but am so "used to" how things are done "elsewhere," that I sometimes struggle to "get it right" here.

Steve

From what I can gather re the Equinox thus far, is that it is probably using higher frequencies and is not going to be as sensitive to deep silver as FBS was. If it can still get down there (and Brandon said it was deeper than his CTX), than I'll take that.
Any more information here?

Albert

I had settled into the etrac/ATpro combo for covering most every hunting need I have. With the hint that the EQ may not be as deep as the FBS machines on deep silver the etrac/EQ combo will be a huge upgrade. From what I gather the EQ- multi freq shifts and is preset for each hunting mode we chose? Why then couldn't they have a deep silver program where the multi freq shift is set to the low side of the freq spectrum? Can they not get this done? Or did they do this on purpose as not to hurt the sales of the FBS machines? Maybe this is something we'll be able to adjust in the software download?

Kenny
[www.youtube.com]

It's certainly going to suit the UK market.

khouse Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I had settled into the etrac/ATpro combo for cover
> ing most every hunting need I have. With the hint
> that the EQ may not be as deep as the FBS machines
> on deep silver the etrac/EQ combo will be a huge u
> pgrade. From what I gather the EQ- multi freq shi
> fts and is preset for each hunting mode we chose?
> Why then couldn't they have a deep silver program
> where the multi freq shift is set to the low side
> of the freq spectrum? Can they not get this done?
> Or did they do this on purpose as not to hurt the
> sales of the FBS machines? Maybe this is somethin
> g we'll be able to adjust in the software download
> ?

steveg............. Well articulated.....and I had given some thought/(creed) to this mindset; yet, I speculated that many folks knew of the dramatic departure from-the-norm...... differences this forum has....as in comparison to all other forums. I'm a true-believer/strong-proponent to consolidation organizational-management. It makes future life much easier. As a detectorist....... we dig up and resurrect the dead. . . . . implements that have been buried/gone for decades/centuries. They are fascinating/educational. The same goes with digging up a dead thread.......... fascinating/educational. . . . . AND time-efficient!

----------------------------------------------

Albert, yes........... I too...would like to see a detector without dead-spots in the conductive spectrum/bandwidth. Many sites that we hunt ... contain U.S. $1 gold coins......... and silver dimes. This spans the entire conductive spectrum/bandwidth. As of current "today" technology................... you must hunt these sites twice. Hunt with two different detectors. One low-conductor detector........ and one high-conductor detector. This is "double-inefficiency".

As humans............... we are 'resistant-to-CHANGE'. ,,,
I pose:

What if..................................... the EQIQ completely rids the hunger/need for the 2-D screen concept.......even for the die-hard 2-D screen users.

The Equinox uses different sets of multiple frequencies in each mode. The "parks" mode is on the lower end of the spectrum and is intended for deeper coin hunting like we would have in the US parks, sports fields etc. The "Fields" mode uses frequencies that are more geared towards the UK/European hunting style in that it's more sensitive to smaller bits i.e. cut hammered, 1/4 staters etc. Beach mode will only operate in Multi frequency and is tailored to suit highly mineralized ground conditions. Prospecting opperates on 20 or 40 kHz and is designed to hit small gold at a reasonable depth in highly mineralized ground. Keep in mind, these modes are still being tweaked and there might be some minor modifications made to improve performance. I think what a lot of people aren't focusing on, is that Multi-IQ is handles mineralized ground better than FBS/BBS. This is why I believe my Equinox is achieving better depth in my hunting areas than my CTX. We all tend to get very hung up on lower frequencies being deeper but that's only half of the equation. How the frequencies are delivered/received plays an equally important roll to how they react with targets in the ground. For example, a 5kHz frequency delivered in Multi-IQ might penetrate mineralized ground better than a 3kHz frequency in FBS. Just like an atom bomb detonated in air would be more catastrophic than the same bomb detonated on the ground. Delivery is key. The Nox is just a whole new category and I know we want to do what's natural and compare it to what we know, but the fact is, we can't... because it's just different.
DISCLAIMER- I'm not an engineer and these examples are how I've interpreted my experience.
To reiterate, I'm not sure why I'm getting the current results that I am. This is my speculation and as I have stated, I'm a fireman, not an engineer and in time, Minelab will release details on the functionality of Multi-IQ. Until then, it's anyone's guess (including my own).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2017 05:04PM by Dr.Tones.

Brandon, what is the numerical range on the TID? When you were detecting the silver roman, the numbers were in the 22-24 range. I realize these are prototypes, and things could still change. Thanks for sharing!