Minelabs Fbs machines Question?

Is It true that The BBS and FBS machines only receive on three frequencies? That the software decides which frequencies to accept according to ground conditions? This being the case the machine might never see the 100 Khz range in the lifetime of its use. The reason I ask is with a high freq as 100 Khz it should kill nuggets. Next question would be in a air test would the machine grab that freq on a nugget and then once placed on the ground a different band might be selected.
Just a thought that if M-L made a machine that had freq locks where you could customize which frequencies it accepted to hunting type there would be little need for owning multiple detectors other then a PI and water machine. Guess that would be my dream machine.
HH

I don't recall if ML has ever stated how many simultaneous frequencies it uses at once, but they do state that when you do a 'noise cancel' that it picks the best frequencies for the environment at that time.

The noise cancel channels has nearly nothing to do with Tx/Rx frequency(s). It is such a minute' freq shift.......that conductivity performance is unaffected; rather, operating stability is gained.

I'm unaware of only 3 freq's being used at any given time.

Yes, the air-test performance on low conductors............vs...............dirt and/or wet salt performance........especially with small nuggets.......or low karat gold......are quite different. But................due to the complex wave-form operation of this platform......it performs better than most in bad dirt.

ML used the multi-frq for marketing very well.
But they are not "hot" on the tiny stuff.
It is better to get a single frq detector for that kind of stuff.
All manus are guilty of marketing hype but
I suppose that is part of the game and the way
they stay in business.

I have wondered about this for many years but have never seen or heard anyone from Minelab give a definite answer. I did however stumble across this on another forum comparing the DFX to the Minelab BBS and FBS machines. I don't know if it is true or not but it makes for an interesting read. Maybe Tom or one of the other rocket surgeons that hang out here can tell me if it computes or not. What follows is a quote and no part of it is mine.

"I beg you pardon if I make some english mistakes. I'm Italian and I'll try to write in your language at my best.

Relating to the White's DFX VS Minelab FBS/BBS Technology....
Well... I can absolutely state that DFX is a real dual frequency VLF operating in the frequency domain while the Minelab

FBS/BBS technology is a patented very smart and effective Time-Domain one.
What does it means?
It's not so simple but I'll try to explain in poor words.
Usually single frequency VLF detectors use simple sinus waves to generate the Trasmit Electromagnetic field. This is the simplest way to do that.
You have to know that DFX uses a square wave generator to create the needed TX electromagnetic field. What's the main issue of a square wave signal? The most interesting part is that this waveform is the result of the ideal sum of lots of simple sinus waves. So actually the DFX trasmits more than just 2 frequencies: it is trasmitting literally an infinite quantity of them! The most important (the one with sensitive energy could be counted around 55)
Btw no all of them have the same amount of importance for our purposes. There is a dominant frequency and lots and lots of "harmonics" waves (even if it's not technically correctr, you can think about these as some sort of echoes of the major signal wave). White's have choosen the 3 KHz and the 15Khz harmonics out of the bunch because they've proven to be very sensitive and effective for the kind of search we're usually interested (read coin-shooting and gold hunting). Actually they could not be considered THE BEST OF THE BEST but they really are a good compromise.
After trasmitting this peculiar "square wave - based" magnetic field, with all those harmonics involved, the receive coil constantly hear for the signal. As already mentioned in the previous posts, in VLF operated detectors, the metallic targets modify the transmitted signal introducing a variable (related to the various kind of targets) "PHASE DELAY". The received signal is STILL a composite wave that incorporates all the mentioned harmonics but, in case of a target interaction, they are somehow modified with the introduction of a phase delay. Note!!! Different harmonics could be less or more effected by this phase delay modification. That's why you have different VDI readings of the same target using 3 Khz OR 15 Khz!
When the signal is received, the DFX main unit preamplify it and then demodulate it to extract the 3Khz and the 15 Khz harmonics. Since then the two signals are processed and the VDI displayed etc etc etc.. Please note that the data processing is ALWAYS done FOCUSING ON FREQUENCY VARIATIONS...That's way I called this "In the Frequency Domain".

Minelab FBS/BBS operates in a very different way. The related registered patent is about the use of a "multi-period rectangular wave" and the processing in the "Time Domain".
Your Etrac, Explorer, Safari etc.. just trasmit a "train" or rectangular waves that have variabile lenght. They could be tought as variable intensity "pulses" very similar to Pulse Induction Metal Detecting Technology.
Rectangular multi-period waves are formed in the same way of the square waves used in the DFX. They both are ideally formed by millions and millions of basic sinus waves. If you could see a ETRAC generated wave in your oscilloscope you could see this variable lenght rectangular shape repeating in the time continuosly like a train. If you analyze this "train" you could pull out 33 major waves (the dominant harmonics with sensitive energy) together with the million others.
Minelab FBS marketing ads claim that 28 are used while BBS only uses 17. Probably Minelab decided that the remaining 5 or 16 could be left out due to signal weakness or redundancy.

Now the most interesting part...

While VLF continuosly monitor the phase delay introduced by metallic targets in the trasmitted wave, the FBS/BBS acts this way:
1) The first "Wagon" of the pulse train is emitted. Imagine is a 3.5 Khz signal. When this wave stops and the signal fall the receiving coil listen to what's happening to the trasmitted signal sampling it AFTER the stop of the first wagon "AT LEAST THREE TIMES". So It's not monitoring the phase delay but it's reading the SIGNAL DECAY AFTER EACH WAGON!!!
Each wagon has different lenght and this implies different frequency harmonics but... BUT... IT'S NOT THE FREQUENCY THAT MATTERS!!! IT'S THE DECAY OF THE SIGNAL AFTER EACH PULSE!!! ATTENTION PLEASE! "Targets have different signal decay when interacting with different frequency magnetic fields"!!!
As you can imagine this could remind you the PULSE INDUCTION technology and, actually, it's a sort of hybrid.
The most important issue is the STUDY OF THE VARIATIONS AS THE TIME PASSES!! That's why FBS is called "Time Domain" Operating Technology. In the PI the sampling technique is slightly different. All the pulse wagons are transmitted, then the power is off and then the sampling begins. In the FBS the sampling/analysis is done after every single "wagon".

We're near the end buddies...

The FBS, after the interactions with different wagons, do compare the different reations with some equations results previously computed. This cross analysis could lead the machine to correctly identify the target due to different reactions to different pulses. You can imagine that doing all this analisys can need a big amount of CPU resources. That's why Minelab FBS models are quite famous for not be so swift in reaction speed. Cheesy

So, in conclusion, FBS cannot be called a REAL MULTIFREQUENCY detector because it just doesn't focus on that! And also the analysis is, as far as you could read from the official patent, is not simultaneous but it is consecutive.

For any of you interested in "WHY FBS AND PULSE INDUCTION WORK THAT WAY?", please ask... I'll be happy to try to put it the easy way...

Before I go, please forgive if I've made some mistakes and I've not always used the most proper tech-names... It was just for the clarity...

Happy VLF-FBS Hunting!
Bodhi3"

Wow, exactly what I was going to say Sometimes I'm glad I'm just an amateur, lol.

steve

i do not know what u consider small targets, but i can tell u the excal. and explorer series detectors will find some mighty small targets from the surf.........some so small one can not image how any detector could find them.

here are some larger targets from two weeks in july 2010....they find many targets even smaller and deep........not my humble opinion..........fact.
.
.

.
.

.
.

neugene

i have always heard the dfx was more minelab than white's...........as the story goes........minelab sold part of the rights to whites to build the dfx.

.
.
<")))))<>(

Nice analysis.

I was a minelab dealer for a few years in the 1990's, and at that time, my distributor told me the same thing. They sold whites the rights to a set of frequencies or system that minelab was not ever going to use.
Or something along that order.

Gravedigger,
I've heard that as well. I'm pretty much geek or nerd I guess. I read, watch and listen to everything I can find that pertains to any of my many hobbies including beeping. The discussion about who owns which technology (Whites or Minelab) is like the chicken or the egg when it comes to opinions found on forums. Like I said in my last post, I'm not sure if that quote was factual or not but in my limited, read almost non-existent, expertise it sounds feasible.
I have owned several Minelabs and a couple of Whites and they have all had their strong points.
I would love to know how every machine by every company works but if that info was readily available, no one company could survive.

Chris

I had a ML dealer way back when I bought my Explorer that Whites did buy the
rights to their DFX and also that Whites couldn't get it to work so ML techs had
to work on it so that it would work.
However Carl from Whites denies that Whites bought any rights from ML
and that includes the V3.
But Carl did mention that Whites contacted ML before the release of the V3 to make
sure it didn't interfere with MLs patents.
I might could find that post if I tried.
There is also the lengend that ML approached Whites before they released hobby detectors
to see if Whites would make their detectors.
Also there was a legend about ML wanting to do a joint venture with Whites and Whites
didn't want any part of it.
So ML decided to make their own detectors.
How much if any of this is true will never be known, I suspect.

But ML did bring out some innovative products at least up to the time they were sold off.
Where they failed I feel is they didn't listen to their fans that their detectors were too heavy.
They were the first to almost exclusively use DD coils which their competitors at the time
didn't seem to see the advantage on using them.
They were killing the competition right up to the time FT acquired Fisher.

About the Whites 2 and 3 frq detectors, I don't see any sign that anyone uses the
multi part that much, what we see is folks picking one of the single frqs to use
that is on the DFX or V3.
Whites didn't take ML competition seriously for years as they were busy
sitting on their thumbs.
And think about it, they missed an opportunity.
They may have been able to corner the market.
Maybe they didn't have good enough engineers?
Believe me, I have always had a lot of respect for Whites and wanted
them to be tops but they stayed in their own comfort zone.
Whites is probably the best known metal detector manufacturer and will
always have a good size of the market but now they have competition
on many fronts...now it appears even from Garrett.
Maybe the hobbly market is large enough to support all the brands easily?

One more word about ML.
I wish they would have furthered their technology with their Musky/Advantage.
I still think about what it would be to have one with at least a meter on it.
To me the Xterra series was a step backwards from the Advantage.

good post above........i like it.

now the advantage....................know little about it, but what i have heard and read.........man it was one hell of a dirt machine...........i think my detecotor dealer still has one brand new one in stock...... or did have a few months back.

i am with you on wanting to know as much as i can about all heaters.

that is one of the great things about the forum.............lots of good info. floating around these threads

good luck

Thanks everyone for your responses.
Ive been trying to find the exact article where I read this but have not been able to find it. Ive been reading hundreds of reports and reviews over the last year. But Here is something similar coming from Minelabs tec reports. I tried to just copy the section 2.9 but that wasn't happening. So if you scroll down to 2.9 they state that low, med and high frequencies are selected by the machine. They are unspecific as to exact # of frequencies in each range in use at any given time.

[www.minelab.com]

Also from Lost Treasure online reviews I found this statement.

The secret to the Explorer's success worldwide is the patented circuitry called Full Band Spectrum (FBS). Unlike other non-Minelab detectors that operate at one or perhaps two frequencies, the FBS circuitry transmits at 28 different frequencies simultaneously. In addition, by extending the upper frequency range 100 kHz and enabling the detector's circuitry to automatically select what specific frequencies are best for each specific site it is used,

It appears the machine is selecting a group of frequencies for use by the CPU.
Have any of you used the V3i head to head with the E-TRAC ?
I would like to have the ability to select frequency but if the etrac still out performs the V3i in both multi freq set up and individual frequency then I will go with it.
Thanks again
godigit

Now ive read the BBS has 17 freqs per channel (11). These freqs are preset 1.7khz apart. Ive read the FBS use 28 freqs that are not PRESET but random per channel (11). Now Tom did i misunderstand that it just doesnt matter which channel is used because its such a minor adjustment? There are a LOT of choices for these freqs when you are talking 1 to 100 khz. Ive always been of the opinion that if we knew what each set of freqs were in each channel it would simplify manually choosing a channel for a give situation. Not know this appears to make the manual setting worthless. By the depth and reaction to EMI and soil one would guess that its averaging around 3Khz.

Dew

The minute' freq adjust that takes place during Channel search....makes a large difference IRT EMI mitigation; yet, the performance differential between these minute' freq differences .... is not measurable.....as far as ..... detectability of targets. In other words: A operating freq of .... say..... 4.500 Khz........vs ....... 4.505 Khz.....will make no difference in detecting a silver Half Dime at max depth; yet, may make a huge difference in EMI mitigation.

Yes, Exp/E-TRAC is complex squarewave utilization/analyzation.

> It appears the machine is selecting a group of
> frequencies for use by the CPU.
> Have any of you used the V3i head to head with the
> E-TRAC ?
> I would like to have the ability to select
> frequency but if the etrac still out performs the
> V3i in both multi freq set up and individual
> frequency then I will go with it.
> Thanks again
> godigit

It is according to what type of detecting you are doing and what
type areas you will detect.
More than likely the Etrac will beat the V3 in mult-frq mode.
There are some that have both and may be able to go into
details about what they see.
It will come down to which brand you want to go with.
Or get both and see what you like.

Quote

ML used the multi-frq for marketing very well.
But they are not "hot" on the tiny stuff.
It is better to get a single frq detector for that kind of stuff.
All manus are guilty of marketing hype but
I suppose that is part of the game and the way
they stay in business.

I'd take this challenge. You can dig all the tiny pieces of stuff you'd like with your uber fast speed demon single freq detector. I'll just go slower, dig half as much, and take home all the great targets.....!

Not with me you won't since I am a long time Explorer XS user, around 10 years.
But you may be better than me with yours.
I do a lot of relic hunting and generally dig everything above iron anyway.
I was actually referring to those small gold chains and those tiny gold ear studs
or small bits of natural gold, like for prospecting.
The OP was wondering about using the ML multis for tiny nuggs.
And since they go up to 100 KHZ if they would be suitable.
I was merely pointing out the fact that part of the reason ML uses the termonology
is for marketing, that it supposed to work well/better for all targets.
We have had to deal with these type questions for a long time
and I have always let folks know whenever they ask.
I don't see any reason why not to inform about the limits of the ML multi-frq
and nugget hunting, especially the tiny stuff is not a strong point for them.
So I am well aware about the Explorers abilities and like mine but I am getting older.
I plan on adding one of these lightweight detectors so that my arm can hold up longer.
ML hasn't got the message yet on getting the weight down on their detectors.

Thanks for the insight Steve. Now that I think about it from a marketing standpoint it makes perfect since that Minelab would not even want this machine to be a nugget detector. It would be better for them if we were to also buy a Gpx. If they truly intended for this to be a multi purpose machine they would have included a prospecting mode that would receive on the higher frequencies only. Im not putting ML down for this as they do not advertise their coin machines for that purpose. At the same time it builds my respect for Whites in that they have always tried to offer true multi purpose units that include prospecting modes as well as relic and beach. I really want a new machine but want to make a wise decision and think I should wait to see what the market brings to the table. In the meantime I might just up for a used Explorer or Safari to quench the thirst and get a taste of a FBS detector.
Be Well

hey godigit1 --

Thanks much for that link you posted. Now there's some good reading material that I'm going to enjoy... Great link -- Thanks!

Steve

If there was one critiicism that folks had about the Pro Coil on the E Trac , it would be that it hits too much of the small stuff .....Small foil at the beach is a PITA , but a nessesary one !!......Foil is the lower end of the Gold range !!.....Jim

This statement tells me that Tom is more involved with Minelab than we might know.


NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The minute' freq adjust that takes place during
> Channel search....makes a large difference IRT EMI
> mitigation; yet, the performance differential
> between these minute' freq differences .... is not
> measurable.....as far as ..... detectability of
> targets. In other words: A operating freq of
> .... say..... 4.500 Khz........vs ....... 4.505
> Khz.....will make no difference in detecting a
> silver Half Dime at max depth; yet, may make a
> huge difference in EMI mitigation.
>
> Yes, Exp/E-TRAC is complex squarewave
> utilization/analyzation.

Even my Old Explorer XS will hit 22 cartridges, small foil and the like.
I have dug I don't know how many pounds of buckshot, large birdshot and
other small lead deformed pieces, sometimes at respectable depths.
But still the single high frq detectors will hit that stuff harder.

godigit, I would choose any Explorer over a Safari since the Explorers
have more adjustments available.

Quote

Not with me you won't since I am a long time Explorer XS user, around 10 years.
But you may be better than me with yours.
I do a lot of relic hunting and generally dig everything above iron anyway.
I was actually referring to those small gold chains and those tiny gold ear studs
or small bits of natural gold, like for prospecting.
The OP was wondering about using the ML multis for tiny nuggs.
And since they go up to 100 KHZ if they would be suitable.
I was merely pointing out the fact that part of the reason ML uses the termonology
is for marketing, that it supposed to work well/better for all targets.
We have had to deal with these type questions for a long time
and I have always let folks know whenever they ask.
I don't see any reason why not to inform about the limits of the ML multi-frq
and nugget hunting, especially the tiny stuff is not a strong point for them.
So I am well aware about the Explorers abilities and like mine but I am getting older.
I plan on adding one of these lightweight detectors so that my arm can hold up longer.
ML hasn't got the message yet on getting the weight down on their detectors.

I see. Sorry - thought you were bashing it. It seems to be the norm on a few places - folks get pretty excited when they have a new "Minelab sucks" story. If I was smart, I'd let those ride, since it would be less Explorers out there finding stuff

Part of that I think is many never fully understand what the tones are telling them.
It takes time to learn the machine, a lot of people don't have the patience for long haul.
Then there are some that get one and try it in their test plot and assume it will react
the same in the real world, my thinking is that is a big mistake.
Those tootie-flootie sounds, they are a lot different from any other detector.
Funny you mention about the bashing, I have read some of those posts for years.
I never felt the need to defend it since I knew how well I was doing with mine and seeing
all the finds on the forums the Explorer users were making.
Problem is ML ripped US made products a new one for many years, the others took
a beating especially in turf hunting.
They are very hard to beat for silver hunting even now.
Explorers have I think the best ID system on the market even up till now and I suppose
the Etrac would be similar.
It has a nice balance of performance for depth, ID and one can set the discrimination
to make it quiet yet still very effective or wide open and hear as much as wanted.
I don't think that balance of overall performance can be matched by any single tone detector.
Then one can slow wayyy down and wiggle around in one spot and shoot for some of those
items hiding in the trash.
I have found too that my Explorer does very well with letting me know when I encounter most
bigger than nails-iron--I rarely get fooled by iron that is not a nail.
Now if ML would just do away with the heavy shaft and put it on a lightweight rod.
I am thinking about modding mine.......
Look at it this way, folks wouldn't waste time bashing it if it wasn't a top notch detector.
But there is nothing wrong with having other detectors to go along with it.
Hit the same area with more than one detector is a good idea.
I am sure the other brands are still trying to figure out a way to beat the Explorers/Etrac.
Hows that for defending?
Audio 1 all the time for me!

i must have misread your post near the top when i posted the pics of tiny things, i thought u said he would not find them too well.......minelabs...........
.
.


Even my Old Explorer XS will hit 22 cartridges, small foil and the like.
I have dug I don't know how many pounds of buckshot, large birdshot and
other small lead deformed pieces, sometimes at respectable depths.
But still the single high frq detectors will hit that stuff harder.
.
harder maybe better, but .........we still hear it fine.
.
.
Now if ML would just do away with the heavy shaft and put it on a lightweight rod................i dream of a minelab setup like the F75....light, battery last forever..........WHAT A HEATER THAT WOULD BE.

I am sure the other brands are still trying to figure out a way to beat the Explorers/Etrac.
Hows that for defending?
.
.
Very good read mr steve.

.
.
<")))))<>(

I can tell you that if I have my ML friends do their noise cancel while standing next to me with my F75 LTD with the pinpoint toggled on, that their Exp/Etrac never interferes with my F75 LTD, but if that's not done then sometimes they knock out my F75 LTD.

This would seem to indicate that the ML does select different frequencies ?

Hey Max, there were some guys years ago that
made their own coils for Explorer.
Way back I was looking for a way to make the coil lighter.
There was one guy that supposedly took the windings out of the
material around it, I emailed the guy and he replied.
But I wanted pics on how he modded it but couldn't get him to do it.
This was before the Explorer 2 and since I have a different computer
from back then, all that stuff is gone....at least I think it is.
Seems to me one of those guys was called BeachComber, that he
made a lightweight coil but I never saw anything.
Charles from Upstate had a website was going to make coils but
never quite got it going but he had info on his site.
He even had some info about the Pulse Devil, that legendary PI
that is supposed to discriminate, now that is one we have waited
on for years.
The holy grail of detectors....one guy claims it has been perfected but
we still don't see it.

But yeah, for a long time I have wanted a lightweight Explorer
and even tried to contact a few that supposedly had made
homemade lightweight coils for it.

those are the two

bernie.....aka beachcomber is still using his 15" homemade coil on his GT and still cleaning up
charles has been Low Key for sometime now........he had all the fancy equipment to make the molds - etc......u remember is waterproof housing he made for his expII......nice ticket.

dave emory's pulse devil...........what a heater if
here is the last thing i read on it, but i thought i remembered something on here a few months back........maybe not...........oldstimers u know
.
.
[www.findmall.com]