Here's the new Minelab Equinox

Keith Southern Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Probably Better/Easier/Cheaper to convert it to Bit data digital signal from coil to control box. which I'm sure Deus does and the Xterra and probably
> most of the FBS units..Digital data link

Deus is the only detector I know of that sends RX signals in a data stream. X-Terra and FBS RX signals are analog.

Quote
Geotech

Quote
go-rebels
So why put a preamp circuit in the coil? Either you pick up noise (eddies) in the added circuitry added to the coil or you pick up noise within the low voltage signal going up the coil wire.

Probably in almost all cases the preamp in the coil is a net benefit.

Quote
Geotech
Putting the preamp in the coil helps with noise a little bit, in that the analog signal running up the cable has more amplitude. In general, the more circuitry you put in the coil the more susceptible it is to potential ground noise.

So in most cases it is a net benefit.

Why don’t all modern detectors have a pre-amp in the coil?

Quote
Geotech

Quote
go-rebels
New detectors are more susceptible to EMI because their power consumption is lower. Older analog units are relatively power hungry and, by definition, less EMI susceptible.

I'd like to know whose definition determined this. It's not even wrong.

It’s not even wrong? ??? (And, of course, circuit design makes a huge difference.)

If I’m pushing bigger voltages across components, aren’t the spurious voltages as a result of external EMI going to contaminate the output signal to a lesser degree by proportion?

Quote
Geotech
I wrote a patent for White's covering the use of acelerometers in metal detectors, US9207315.

In layman’s terms, what was the purpose and benefit for using accelerometers in the coil per your patent?

You're correct about whether an in-coil pre-amp is beneficial or not, hence why not every high-end machine does it.

In-coil amps need powering. So that may mean an additional wire in the coil cable, or you could get creative and derive power other ways.

It also increases the cost of the coil, every additional coil you buy contains 'unnecessary' electronics thay you already have in your existing coil.

Cables can exhibit noise caused by 'microphony' when they are moved. A pre-amp will lessen the severity of such interference, so potentially allowing a simpler cheaper cable.

Having an amplifier with gain ( I guess gain is 10 ->100 ) allows you to adjust the gain with the coil, eg. you can make a small coil have a higher gain than a larger one.

If I was designing a coil pre-amp, I'd think of using a differential output amplifier, and send the signal up the cable as a (screened) twisted pair. A matching differential receiver is on the main control board. This eliminates most interference and other unwanted stuff, like ground wire noise and DC current effects.

So we know that the design of the CTX coils were different than previous ML coils. Do we know if Equinox coils offer a different hardware design from what we’ve seen in the past?

go-rebels Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If I’m pushing bigger voltages across components, aren’t the spurious voltages as a result of external EMI going to contaminate the output signal to a
> lesser degree by proportion?

Maybe, but you gotta get to the bigger voltages first. And all detectors start out pretty much the same: an RX coil with a microvolt signal. That's where the EMI hits you, not 10 amp stages later when you have a 20v signal.

Older designs used higher voltages out of necessity; the opamps of the time required 10V or more. They also burned more current to achieve performance, because the silicon processes of the time were larger and had higher parasitic capacitances. And, most detector designs took the signal all the way to the speaker in analog. Today, opamps can run at much lower voltages with much lower currents and achieve the same (or usually better) performance at a fraction of the power. And once the signal is digitized, voltage doesn't matter... 1V is plenty.

If you have a perception that modern detectors are noisier than older designs, it's more likely because the older designs were just less sensitive. Every inch of depth we've gained over the years came at a price.

> In layman’s terms, what was the purpose and benefit for using accelerometers in the coil per your patent?

Pretty much spelled out in the patent, but in a nutshell, if you know the sweep speed, when the coil reverses direction, when it's stationary, when it's being bobbed, etc then you can automatically select/adjust processing.

Quote
Geotech
If you have a perception that modern detectors are noisier than older designs, it's more likely because the older designs were just less sensitive.

Maybe we need to define ‘older.’ The CZ-6 launched more than 25 years ago, yet I consider that platform roughly equally sensitive compared to anything built to date using VLF, BBS or FBS technology. And I’ve used the CZ-3D in places the Etrac was masked by silent EMI and my F75 couldn’t be quieted down. I’ve never found a site where I had to put down the CZ and pick up my F75 or Etrac.

Do you believe the newer platforms, compared to the CZ, are inherently more sensitive? And how much ‘more’ is more... 0.01", 0.1", 1"?

go-rebels Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And I’ve used the CZ-3D in places the Etrac was masked by silent EMI and my F75 couldn’t be quieted
> down. I’ve never found a site where I had to put down the CZ and pick up my F75 or Etrac.

With external EMI, all these machines are "seeing" the exact same thing. Internally, they do things differently. Ferinstance, the CZ has a lot of pre-demod channel filtering that the other designs don't have. Placement of the demod clocks matters as well, and this can be statistical. That is, one detector can be noisy at a location, while another same-model runs quiet. What doesn't make a lot of difference in the designs is how much power they are consuming. The old CZ design could be updated to modern parts at lower voltages, and perform the same. If I could simply crank up the internal voltages and make noise disappear, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Quote
Geotech
If I could simply crank up the internal voltages and make noise disappear, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

So we come full circle and hit the shrinking silicon junction & lower breakdown voltages...

I see a continued trend to digitize signals in the coil, not just coil ID but the ground response signal and accelerator data too. The Deus model will become "the model" for the future. I could see the control box eliminated altogether, instead pushing data to an android/iPhone app.

Here you are:
[airmetaldetectors.com]

Wow, never knew one existed. Power-on with a magnet!

For those interested in computational speed (I am not), the iPhone 7 runs ~300GFLOPS...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2018 01:13PM by go-rebels.

I think that is only prototype... right now.

They have a Ukraine calling code. Sounds very interesting. Looks like a Deus style coil in white. Nose heavy for sure. I like the Minelab style of putting the stem in the middle of the coil for a better balance. Took the plunge and ordered the 800 and the 6" coil. Buying from a local new dealer so not to far down the line. He says they will be slow to come out at first. Hope ML won't starve the smaller guys to feed the bulk dealer and we all know who that is. If Fisher should pop up with something outstanding I will just have to put the dogs to work. While I will be using it mainly on the beach I am just getting a couple of permissions in Brunswick and Horry county. There are some old farms hidden away here that could produce a few 1800 coins for me. Won't be parting with my ET or Excal II just yet.

go-rebels Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see a continued trend to digitize signals in the coil, not just coil ID but the ground response signal and accelerator data too. The Deus model will
> become "the model" for the future. I could see the control box eliminated altogether, instead pushing data to an android/iPhone app.

Maybe, it's been discussed at FTP and even at White's. Here are the current issues:

• Many phone displays are unreadable in bright sunlight
• Running an intensive app like a metal detector will likely drain the phone in 4 hours or so
• Signal latency, esp for multifrequency
• Lack of control over the quality of the phone; some users may be deeply disappointed and blame the detector

I think you'll see some novelty detectors first (like the Go-Find) and then low-end stuff. Not sure if high-end will go there. Never say never.

This coil has own display... so it can work without phone. But phone can work like Deus panel. Only for precision adjustment.

Deus model being model for the future.
Yes
But not linked with cell phone.

Rather detectors being smaller and lighter.

If we think back.

Electronic gadgets being smaller meant being more expensive.
And was the smaller necessarily better performing?
Nope

Fad is the word here.
Deus was a fad at first.
But Equinox could make this supposed fad more the norm with time.


Remember the older original cell phones???
And folks thought they were dream machines.

Just like those original vhs camcorders.
Monsters now when we think about NOW.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2018 03:55PM by Sod-buster.

Meanwhile in Berlin: [www.youtube.com]
(p.s. I came across it, it's not mine)

That's hilarious! I love it!

Too funny!

I have watched that Hitler clip a dozen times on different detecting scenarios.....It's still cracks me up.

[www.youtube.com]

Hitler goes to a tot lot with the ATpro

New Equinox info posted.
Equinox tech part 3 dated 15 Jan 2018
[www.minelab.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2018 02:18AM by Sod-buster.

So Part 3 describes this:



Two notes:

1) IQ still uses square waveforms which theoretically transmits an infinite number of frequencies when described in the (mathematical) frequency domain, where the software does all it’s calculations. Of course the higher harmonics have decreasing amplitude but they are there nonetheless, just like we see in BBS and FBS.

2) Both graphs show identical signals when viewed in the frequency domain except for the transmitted phase angle of the primary frequencies. I’ve read many of Minelab’s patents and never have I seen transmitted phase angles being significant to the patent and I can’t see how transmitted phase angles (changing the order of the primary square wave frequency mix) would make any difference.

I’m thinking there is a significant improvement in signal analysis, especially where it comes to minimizing error analysis, than anything related to these wave forms. Even ML states, "the real detection ‘magic’ doesn’t happen with what is transmitted..." If someone thinks I’m off base regarding Minelab’s "Part 3", please explain why.

So a couple questions with my speculative answers.

Could the bbs or even the fbs wqveform be used and similar processing like what is used in Equinox be used and arrive at same point as Equinox performance? No

I also think it is a stretch to think Minelab, at least some of the engineers didn't use lessons learned from bbs and fbs to arrive at this supposedly new tech.

Lower conductors were always a problem for bbs and fbs tech.
And this new tech seems is a better balancing act for both higher and lower conductors.

Now is fbs tech finished as far as future development by Minelab?
I doubt it.
And it will probably have a new name in the future, maybe not, who knows.

Goal of Minelab seems was one detector to be better across the board detector for detecting in general.

Sort of sticking a stick in an eye here too, almost flaunting,,oh here is the waveform other manufacturers, but you don't know what to do with, we do though.
I mean what stopped another manufacturer from discovering this?
Like Minelab says not a derivative of bbs or fbs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2018 02:52PM by Sod-buster.

go-rebels Wrote:
------------------------------------------------
> I’m thinking there is a significant improvement in
> signal analysis, especially where it comes to mini
> mizing error analysis, than anything related to th
> ese wave forms. Even ML states, "the real detecti
> on ‘magic’ doesn’t happen with what is transmitted
> ..." If someone thinks I’m off base regarding Mine
> lab’s "Part 3", please explain why.


What effect the change/difference has in multi freq. vs bbs in the charts shown above = I have no clue but seems to me they changed the time/duration in which the square wave is amplified --- instead of a long amplification and then and bunch of short burst --- they now evened it out to where the wave amplification has been set to an equal amount of time/duration? Or in other words they changed the voltage applied to the impedance and the current driven through it to an equal amount of phase/time VS in BBS where it's a long duration for a certain amount of time and then sped up to short burst of duration/s and then back to a long duration (then repeats) --- at least that's is how I see it, although, I could be wrong cuz I'm no expert

Quote
MichiganRelicHunter
seems to me they changed the time/duration in which the square wave is amplified --- instead of a long amplification and then and bunch of short burst --- they now evened it out to where the wave amplification has been set to an equal amount of time/duration?

Yes, and if the pictures above are scaled accurately in time then the older wave form has a greater amplitude of lower frequencies compared to the newer waveform of the Equinox, therefore, all else being equal, the Equinox would be more sensitive to lower conductors than higher conductors, which I believe they have already said.

Both waveforms are happening at KHz rates so neither would be perceived by the operator as a function of swing speed.

And they certainly built off the knowledge of their BBS and FBS technologies; question is, are the waveform pictures they present here actually significant or just marketing hype? I’m thinking the post-processing software is where it’s at... not in these real time wave forms.

[www.cabelas.com]

Curiosity got the best of me, I called cabelas to see if they were in stock, and he said they are drop shipped from Minelab. Must be getting close!

Cabela's now showing "SOLD OUT"

I saw on facebook and another site a chart showing a comparison of various detectors to the EQ. Pretty general but they gave themselves good marks. Not sure Deus got all they deserved..... like gold hunting when they have those higher freqs or beach hunting where they didnt consider dry sand i dont think. Are we looking at more selling ...... if not this is still looking good for beach hunters.