Welcome!
» Log In
» Create A New Profile
Something to discuss
Posted by Bill long
This forum is currently read only. You can not log in or make any changes. This is a temporary situation.
|
Re: Something to discuss December 03, 2017 01:03AM |
I do use a mixture of old and new technology and also some have screens,but i never ever make a dig/no dig decision on solely what a screen i.d tells me,audio is far more reliable at greater depth,one example is i have a Deus but for the most part the control box is either in my car or in my pocket when i am detecting as its used solely for just setting up and fine tweaking of the machine for the site that i am detecting that day.
On say a roman site i would use settings that i would not use on a pasture site,its handy being able too setup different tones but that in my mind is different from replying on a screen on making a dig decision,if the headphones give me a good audio signal but registers nothing on the screen like what a Deus and other machine can because the target is slightly deeper to trigger the screen it still has too come out and satisfy my curiosity as that way i wont miss decent targets.
Audio has and always will be far more reliable than what any screen can can provide,even then when the audio signal is on the limit like on a deep pasture site then threshold can still give you some indication that a 'possible' decent target is in the ground,its still has to come out,it could be rubbish but also it could be a very desirable deep gold hammered coin.I dont take that risk
On say a roman site i would use settings that i would not use on a pasture site,its handy being able too setup different tones but that in my mind is different from replying on a screen on making a dig decision,if the headphones give me a good audio signal but registers nothing on the screen like what a Deus and other machine can because the target is slightly deeper to trigger the screen it still has too come out and satisfy my curiosity as that way i wont miss decent targets.
Audio has and always will be far more reliable than what any screen can can provide,even then when the audio signal is on the limit like on a deep pasture site then threshold can still give you some indication that a 'possible' decent target is in the ground,its still has to come out,it could be rubbish but also it could be a very desirable deep gold hammered coin.I dont take that risk
|
Re: Something to discuss December 03, 2017 08:11AM |
Bill long Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With all the high tech detectors we use today with
> all the different tones, ID numbers and such. When
> we get a hit are we looking for a reason to dig it
> or a reason not to. Crazy question ain't it?
Bill,
Not a crazy question at all...I think it's an excellent question.
I've had that conversation many times over the decades.
To Illustrate: A tendency I've seen so many times, is for someone with a new (to them) detector to take it out and made several 'good' finds before they've figured out the machine...simply by digging more 'iffy signals'. (Thus looking for a reason TO dig.)
They proudly tell everyone how much better this new machine is than the old one...and how it finds things the old one missed.
But once they've 'learned' the machine, they stop digging those iffy signals, and their finds rate goes right back down to what it was before.
It's because they ended up learning to look for reasons NOT to dig...and thus returned to their old habits of passing up iffy targets.
I've told guys looking for deep silver many times over the years to "Stop looking for reasons NOT to dig!"
(And yes...you'll dig more trash...but if you're not digging trash, you're not finding silver.)
Until detectors are 100% perfect at discrimination in any ground, at any depth, you're still going to have to use the eyeball discriminator to be sure.
To be fair, I still have to catch myself being tempted to pass up targets that aren't perfect...especially when I'm getting tired at the end of a long hunt.
In today's heavily hunted old parks, the perfect signals are long since gone. For the most part, all that's left are the deep 'iffy's' and the co-locate 'iffy's'.
In those environments, you're going to have to look for reasons TO dig...if you want to find the goodies.
Otherwise, you need to be happy with clad.
Who knows....maybe the Equinox will help us change all that.
mike
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/2017 08:26AM by Mike in CO.
-------------------------------------------------------
> With all the high tech detectors we use today with
> all the different tones, ID numbers and such. When
> we get a hit are we looking for a reason to dig it
> or a reason not to. Crazy question ain't it?
Bill,
Not a crazy question at all...I think it's an excellent question.
I've had that conversation many times over the decades.
To Illustrate: A tendency I've seen so many times, is for someone with a new (to them) detector to take it out and made several 'good' finds before they've figured out the machine...simply by digging more 'iffy signals'. (Thus looking for a reason TO dig.)
They proudly tell everyone how much better this new machine is than the old one...and how it finds things the old one missed.
But once they've 'learned' the machine, they stop digging those iffy signals, and their finds rate goes right back down to what it was before.
It's because they ended up learning to look for reasons NOT to dig...and thus returned to their old habits of passing up iffy targets.
I've told guys looking for deep silver many times over the years to "Stop looking for reasons NOT to dig!"
(And yes...you'll dig more trash...but if you're not digging trash, you're not finding silver.)
Until detectors are 100% perfect at discrimination in any ground, at any depth, you're still going to have to use the eyeball discriminator to be sure.
To be fair, I still have to catch myself being tempted to pass up targets that aren't perfect...especially when I'm getting tired at the end of a long hunt.
In today's heavily hunted old parks, the perfect signals are long since gone. For the most part, all that's left are the deep 'iffy's' and the co-locate 'iffy's'.
In those environments, you're going to have to look for reasons TO dig...if you want to find the goodies.
Otherwise, you need to be happy with clad.
Who knows....maybe the Equinox will help us change all that.
mike
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/2017 08:26AM by Mike in CO.
|
Re: Something to discuss December 03, 2017 11:38AM |
NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mike........ well stated.
Thank you, sir.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mike........ well stated.
Thank you, sir.
|
Re: Something to discuss November 15, 2019 12:36AM |
PhDtector Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I dig or not depends on these things:
>
> 1. Audible signal
> 2. Screen info.
> 3. How much trash I've already dug.
> 4. My attitude/mood that day.
>
> (Sometimes no. 4 may become no. 1).
Yep agree with this wholeheartedly
If you're at a site with tons of small arms shells, it gets tedious digging them. On the same token, I've also dug some pretty cool targets in those ranges, so it just depends. If I've been digging tons of them with no keepers, and I'm getting past my half way point of the hunt, I tend to get into cherry picking mode. Especially if it's a site I don't have competition at, as those targets aren't going anywhere, so they live to see another day in the dirt until I return. It also depends on the site, we have a few (very few on the west coast) late 1700's to early 1800's sites that I will dig every conductor that makes a peep because these old sites tend not to have too many small arms shell discards, and those conductors that come in the same TID range tend to be small buttons and other interesting bits.
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I dig or not depends on these things:
>
> 1. Audible signal
> 2. Screen info.
> 3. How much trash I've already dug.
> 4. My attitude/mood that day.
>
> (Sometimes no. 4 may become no. 1).
Yep agree with this wholeheartedly
If you're at a site with tons of small arms shells, it gets tedious digging them. On the same token, I've also dug some pretty cool targets in those ranges, so it just depends. If I've been digging tons of them with no keepers, and I'm getting past my half way point of the hunt, I tend to get into cherry picking mode. Especially if it's a site I don't have competition at, as those targets aren't going anywhere, so they live to see another day in the dirt until I return. It also depends on the site, we have a few (very few on the west coast) late 1700's to early 1800's sites that I will dig every conductor that makes a peep because these old sites tend not to have too many small arms shell discards, and those conductors that come in the same TID range tend to be small buttons and other interesting bits.
|
Re: Something to discuss November 15, 2019 12:46AM |
Wow, this is an old post.
I distinctly recall when the very first TID machines hit the market, in about 1983-ish. Several of us balked at the notion. And would say things like : "That's ridiculous. You're going to dig it up anyhow, so why do you need a read-out # before hand ?" haha
And even now, even when I'm in "dig all relic mindset", (going to dig it whether it read foil or quarter), yet it's still fun to have the readout or tone or whatever. There's something exciting about getting the "perfect penny/dime" signal, in an area where you *know* that there is zero chance that it's a modern coin
I distinctly recall when the very first TID machines hit the market, in about 1983-ish. Several of us balked at the notion. And would say things like : "That's ridiculous. You're going to dig it up anyhow, so why do you need a read-out # before hand ?" haha
And even now, even when I'm in "dig all relic mindset", (going to dig it whether it read foil or quarter), yet it's still fun to have the readout or tone or whatever. There's something exciting about getting the "perfect penny/dime" signal, in an area where you *know* that there is zero chance that it's a modern coin
