Hi all.

I have a question about something I don't totally understand, with the Equinox -- ground balance.

Apparently, if I understand pages 40 and 41 of the manual correctly, there are two basic ways to run the machine -- NON-tracking ground balance, and tracking ground balance.


NON-TRACKING

If you wish to run NON-tracking ground balance, there are two ways apparently to set the ground balance "number." 1 -- manually, i.e. you choose the best "number" for the ground balance (choose manual balance from the ground balance menu, bob the coil, and manually adjust the ground balance numbers up and down until the ground response is "quiet,") OR, 2 -- automatically, i.e. you let the machine choose the best "number" for the ground balance (choose auto-balance from the ground balance menu, bob the coil, and allow the machine to adjust the ground balance numbers). Either way you choose to set your ground balance number, either manually OR automatically, you are running a "fixed" balance, if I understand correctly. In other words, you are NOT "tracking." The ground-balance number is "fixed," until and unless you choose to "re-balance," at some point.

TRACKING

If you wish to run TRACKING ground balance, then the machine "tracks," and adjusts/changes the ground balance number automatically, as needed in real time, as you pass over differing amounts of soil mineralization, per feedback from the ground.

NOW, with that said, here's my issue. Intuitively, I would have thought that TRACKING balance would be the "default," with NON-TRACKING (i.e. setting a fixed ground balance -- either manually or through the automatic feature) something that a more "advanced" user might choose, so as to have better "control" of the exact setting. HOWEVER, this is not the way the machine is set up. The machine is set to default to NON-TRACKING ground balance (and a default balance number of "0"), in Park, Field, and Beach mode. And furthermore, not only is "non-tracking ground balance" the default setting, but according to the manual this is the RECOMMENDED way to hunt these types of sites. TRACKING ground balance, on the other hand, is the "default" ONLY in the GOLD modes (so as to "ensure that ground balance is always set correctly," says the manual).

So, what I am missing here? Why would Minelab recommend NON-tracking ground balance as the default for most hunting, and tracking balance ONLY in gold mode? Why would I not want to run tracking ground balance ALL the time? It would seem that there must be some "negative" associated with choosing "tracking balance" when hunting in parks or yards or whatever, otherwise Minelab would not RECOMMEND using non-tracking balance in these types of sites (and would not have set the default that way).

Can someone help me understand this better? What would be the negative of running tracking balance? Could there be some "performance loss" on the Equinox when running "tracking," such that in "mild" or relatively "heterogeneous" ground, it's best NOT to "track?"

Thanks,

Steve



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2018 08:30AM by steveg.

My take on it was exactly as yours Steve.
I set mine up in Auto Tracking just because of my experience with the FBS Auto Tracking
and how it well performs in my area. All I can gather from Minelabs thinking is that most Parks
are mild steady ground but that’s not the case in my area..
I would like to hear Tom Dankowski and Steve Herchbach’s take on this since they were part of the development team.

Bryan



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2018 05:51AM by Cabin Fever.

Bryan --

Glad I'm not the only one wondering about this! My inclination is to just set whatever mode I'm hunting in, to "tracking," but it's that "recommendation" by Minelab in the manual that "non-tracking" is recommended in Park, Field, and Beach modes, that concerns me and gives me pause. Unless I'm reading too much into Minelab's words in the manual, there MUST be a reason why setting other modes to "track" might not be the best idea...

Steve

The new video of the GB setting of the Deus maybe interesting:

[www.youtube.com] 2.58



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2018 09:33AM by wilci.

"Why would I not want to run tracking ground balance ALL the time?"
The ground-tracking electronics/software doesn't know what is below the coil. It could be ground, it could be 'ground plus target', and it's not that easy to reliably distinguish the two. So 'tracking ground balance' can easily track incorrectly, due to interpreting small targets, nails etc as part of the ground signal.
I know nothing about prospecting, but assume it's easier to distinguish strong 'nugget-country' dirt from the stuff buried in it. So tracking work better in this niche.

Pimento Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Why would I not want to run tracking
> ground balance ALL the time?"
> The ground-tracking electronics/software doesn't k
> now what is below the coil. It could be ground, it
> could be 'ground plus target', and it's not that e
> asy to reliably distinguish the two. So 'tracking
> ground balance' can easily track incorrectly, due
> to interpreting small targets, nails etc as part o
> f the ground signal.
> I know nothing about prospecting, but assume it's
> easier to distinguish strong 'nugget-country' dirt
> from the stuff buried in it. So tracking work bett
> er in this niche.

Pimento

I have to wonder if using tracking ground balance might effect the iron bias setting in a negative way.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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.

Nothing to add except that THESE are the types of threads that make this site great.

Guys like me that are passionate, but have only detected for 4-5 years, love the knowledge sharing and discussion of the more seasoned detectorists.

When nugget hunting with a GPX, I, and most of the guys I hunt with, choose to hunt in "fixed" ground balance mode...in other words not in auto tracking. When using fixed ground balance it is up to the operator to keep the machine balanced as the ground changes by performing frequent ground balancing using the "quick grab" ground balance button. Listening to the stability, or lack thereof, of the threshold will tell the operator if the machine is in balance or not. The reason to hunt in "fixed" is that, in the gold fields, the operator can gain clues from the changing mineralisation of the ground as to where the gold may be hiding. Another belief, though I believe this is carried over from older machines/tech, is that that auto tracking feature will track out small nuggets after a couple of sweeps. Hunting in "fixed" gives the operator the feeling of being in control. Whereas, hunting in auto track the operator has to trust that the machine knows best. Auto tracking has come a loooong way. After using machines like the SDC and E-Trac, that only have auto tracking, I'm convinced that the auto tracking feature is the way to go in most situations.

Dean

One remark frequently heard about using tracking or not with the GPX machines, is that fixed GB provides more depth of detection and is therefore generally recommended. Nothing scientific here, to be sure, but if one considers a tracking GB setting, it stands to reason that the current setting will lag behind the present location by some degree as you move over the ground and the machine adjusts the GB setting - catching up, as it were. Consider also the possibility that some of the changes in ground readings are more abrupt and others less abrupt. How much smoothing (of this curve) is built into the tracking?
Contrast that to a user using ground grab frequently to reset the GB precisely to the present location. Caveat: One must remember to constantly monitor GB settings and readings and frequently ground grab.

Six of one and half a dozen of another? Quite possibly. Grid a small area in fixed GB and then in tracking, or vice-versa, and see if you notice any difference.

Wayne

Pleasant Garden, NC
AT Max, Nokta Impact, MX Sport, Nokta FORS Relic, GPX 4800, Infinium, Racer, Deus, F75SE, Nautilus DMC II (order of acquisition, last to first)

Does an archeologist argue with a plow? A bureaucrat with a bulldozer?

The ground balance settings and options seem similar to CTX. Is the default 0 just like ETRAC and default on CTX? Really only need manual or tracking GB in tough environments? Will be interesting to hear more. One positive for FBS in my area is you never really have to think about GB. Turn on, noise cancel, and then hunt.

detectingMO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The ground balance settings and options seem simil
> ar to CTX. Is the default 0 just like ETRAC and d
> efault on CTX? Really only need manual or trackin
> g GB in tough environments? Will be interesting t
> o hear more. One positive for FBS in my area is y
> ou never really have to think about GB. Turn on,
> noise cancel, and then hunt.


Can't say for sure.
I say no though based on the following,
I just went behind house in clean field.
Park 1 multi frequency,
Now pumping GB shows 33 in window. Holding accept reject button with GB selected with setting button,
I set GB to 0.
Turned on tracking.
Monitored GB setting as I Swept like I was hunting, swept for 5 minutes total.
It took this long sweeping for GB setting to get to climb feom 0 to number. 31. Two points shy of pumping ground balance reading.

11" deep nickel sounds a lot better using pumping ground balance vs using 0 setting for GB.

IMO CTX and Etrac both tracked faster.
We had nothing to montior though, expect bobbing coil and see amount of feedback raising or lowering coil.
Granted CTX had way to manually GB.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2018 07:26PM by tnsharpshooter.

I'd rather set my own ground balance...I can always tell by the machines reaction when the soil changes, especially in all metal. For me, I want the unit to go deeeeep, signal when it hits and tell me near what the target is.....the less the unit has to do the better it can do the important things.Ground tracking, we don't need no stinking ground tracking.

Dean --

You just laid out EXACTLY why it seems counter-intuitive the way the Equinox is set up as a "default," and what the manual recommends. What you described about WHEN you run manual balance (NOT tracking balance), and why, makes sense to me -- and that's how I've always understood it. So, my INSTINCT is to set up the Equinox to "tracking," every time I hunt it. But, that "recommendation" in the manual to run in non-tracking ground balance in parks, etc. causes me to think "OK, despite my gut instinct, do they know something that I don't, such that I should just follow the manual's advice?" Obviously, some testing is what I intend, in my test garden, in order to try and sort this out with real results, in my dirt. But until then, I sure would like to know the logic here -- which perhaps someone more familiar with the "guts" of the machine like NASA-Tom might be able to shed some light on?

Steve

bado1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When nugget hunting with a GPX, I, and most of the
> guys I hunt with, choose to hunt in "fixed" ground
> balance mode...in other words not in auto tracking
> . When using fixed ground balance it is up to the
> operator to keep the machine balanced as the groun
> d changes by performing frequent ground balancing
> using the "quick grab" ground balance button. List
> ening to the stability, or lack thereof, of the th
> reshold will tell the operator if the machine is i
> n balance or not. The reason to hunt in "fixed" is
> that, in the gold fields, the operator can gain cl
> ues from the changing mineralisation of the ground
> as to where the gold may be hiding. Another belief
> , though I believe this is carried over from older
> machines/tech, is that that auto tracking feature
> will track out small nuggets after a couple of swe
> eps. Hunting in "fixed" gives the operator the fee
> ling of being in control. Whereas, hunting in auto
> track the operator has to trust that the machine k
> nows best. Auto tracking has come a loooong way. A
> fter using machines like the SDC and E-Trac, that
> only have auto tracking, I'm convinced that the au
> to tracking feature is the way to go in most situa
> tions.
>
> Dean



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2018 06:32AM by steveg.

Agree, Craig -- I just turn on FBS, noise cancel, and go.

But I always assumed that there was some sort of "tracking" of ground balance going on in the guts of FBS machines, it was "always on" such that you don't have to "mess with it?" Maybe that's totally wrong, but SOMEHOW, it compensates for ground conditions, doesn't it? Analogously, I would think "tracking" on the Equinox would be the "most similar" way to run the Equinox to FBS machines, but maybe I'm totally off, there...

Steve

detectingMO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The ground balance settings and options seem simil
> ar to CTX. Is the default 0 just like ETRAC and d
> efault on CTX? Really only need manual or trackin
> g GB in tough environments? Will be interesting t
> o hear more. One positive for FBS in my area is y
> ou never really have to think about GB. Turn on,
> noise cancel, and then hunt.

tnsharpshooter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> detectingMO Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The ground balance settings and options seem sim
> il
> > ar to CTX. Is the default 0 just like ETRAC and
> d
> > efault on CTX? Really only need manual or track
> in
> > g GB in tough environments? Will be interesting
> t
> > o hear more. One positive for FBS in my area is
> y
> > ou never really have to think about GB. Turn on
> ,
> > noise cancel, and then hunt.
>
>
> Can't say for sure.
> I say no though based on the following,
> I just went behind house in clean field.
> Park 1 multi frequency,
> Now pumping GB shows 33 in window. Holding accep
> t reject button with GB selected with setting butt
> on,
> I set GB to 0.
> Turned on tracking.
> Monitored GB setting as I Swept like I was hunting
> , swept for 5 minutes total.
> It took this long sweeping for GB setting to get
> to climb feom 0 to number. 31. Two points shy of
> pumping ground balance reading.
>
> 11" deep nickel sounds a lot better using pumping
> ground balance vs using 0 setting for GB.
>
> IMO CTX and Etrac both tracked faster.
> We had nothing to montior though, expect bobbing c
> oil and see amount of feedback raising or lowering
> coil.
> Granted CTX had way to manually GB.

Interesting, on "how long" it took to "track up to" the number that the machine chose during an auto ground balance.

I need to do some testing...

Steve

Always try to AUTO Grnd Balance.
Always try to 'not' use Tracking. It will indeed 'track-out' faint targets.

NASA-Tom,

Thanks. Ironically (as I hadn't read your post yet), after some pondering, I had decided that this is the way I'd use it, from now on; it's the way I handled GB on a short hunt today -- "auto ground balance," to achieve proper GB, but then not run tracking. It seemed to work well. For what it's worth, my park's dirt balanced, using the "auto-balance" method, in the teens (14-19, at different times during the hunt).

Thanks for clarifying that the "preferred" method for running this unit, per the manual, is the same thing you'd recommend...

Steve

There's a lot of unsuspecting subline/rationalization behind Auto Ground Balance...... especially with multi-freq units.

NASA-Tom --

Interesting. Implying the machine does a better job of setting proper balance, than will generally be achieved by a user just "listening" for the proper balance setting?

Steve

For instance: A Manual Grnd Bal of..... say....... '34'.......,,,,,,,,, is not the same as a Auto Grnd Bal of '34'.

Yes, tracking will, indeed, balance out the smallest of targets. When the SDC does it you just have to swing away from the target for a few sweeps then back over it again and the target "reappears". What it means in the real world is that the piece of gold is so small (usually won't weigh on a scale) that it's not worth the time to recover it. I don't believe, perhaps I'm wrong, that modern auto tracking will track out a significant target like a coin or button,etc. I recover some very small targets, usually copper fragments, with the E-trac. The SDC will NOT track out even a tiny .2 gram nugget. So, I guess what I'm asking or asserting is that modern auto tracking will not track out a "desirable" target.(?) Perhaps it will track out a "deep on the edge of detection" target? Tom?

Steve,
On the GPX when you engage the quick grab button and pump the coil the machine performs an auto ground balance. If "fixed" is selected it does not go in to auto-tracking. As the ground changes, the operator has to re-perform the GB operation...sometimes very frequently. If "tracking" is selected the operator performs the GB operation once then the machine does the re-balancing as the ground changes. There are advantages to using both modes and knowing when to use them in the gold fields.

Dean

With a manual fixed...dont some gold hunters use a bit minus GB. Anyone with tracking swing reapeated over a target she goes away. Being able to have a tone for GB and the ability to adjust it up and down will be interesting to play with.

Fringe depth targets.............. regardless of size................ can easily be tracked out.
Small gold jewelry targets can be tracked out.
Be conservative in its use.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For instance: A Manual Grnd Bal of..... say.....
> .. '34'.......,,,,,,,,, is not the same as a Auto
> Grnd Bal of '34'.

That's exactly what I was wondering, as that's what I thought you implied by your post, but wasn't sure.

VERY interesting, and something I will absolutely lock into the memory banks...

Steve

bado1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Steve,
> On the GPX when you engage the quick grab button a
> nd pump the coil the machine performs an auto grou
> nd balance. If "fixed" is selected it does not go
> in to auto-tracking. As the ground changes, the op
> erator has to re-perform the GB operation...someti
> mes very frequently. If "tracking" is selected the
> operator performs the GB operation once then the m
> achine does the re-balancing as the ground changes
> . There are advantages to using both modes and kno
> wing when to use them in the gold fields.
>
> Dean

Dean --

Thanks much for that info. Yes, I come to realize by reading on various forums, that experienced gold prospectors are much more in tune with, and keen on, how to use ground balance to the maximum possible advantage. Being that the majority of my detecting experience is with old FBS machines, that didn't allow "ground balance," and thus not something I have gotten used to even thinking about, it's something I'm nowhere near as well-versed on, as I should be (hence my questions here).

The discussion about auto-track "tracking out" tiny, or very deep, targets (i.e. very weak signals) makes sense to me, as obviously the more subtle a signal, to more difficult it would be for an algorithm to separate "the wheat from the chaff" -- i.e. weak ground return from weak target signal...

Steve

SteveG.....memory serves me, didn't you use to run a f-70? Had fast grab and manual ground balance. As I recall, you were not fond of that unit.

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NASA-Tom Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For instance: A Manual Grnd Bal of..... say...
> ..
> > .. '34'.......,,,,,,,,, is not the same as a Aut
> o
> > Grnd Bal of '34'.
>
> That's exactly what I was wondering, as that's wha
> t I thought you implied by your post, but wasn't s
> ure.
>
> VERY interesting, and something I will absolutely
> lock into the memory banks...
>
> Steve

Sounds like some intentional offset with auto GB is done vs manual. (Small)
How I interpret.

ozzie --

IMPRESSIVE memory!

Yep -- early on, right at the beginning of when I started getting serious about the hobby, I traded in the old Bounty Hunter I had for ages, and got an F-70. I can't recall the GB procedure for sure, but I think it did have "ground grab" or "fast grab" such that you just bobbed the coil until the GB number stabilized. Even so, at the time I only had a rudimentary idea of the "why's" of ground balancing -- only that you were "supposed" to "balance" the machine, so I did. I switched to an Explorer after about 4 months of using the F-70.

I also had a Gold Bug Pro and F19, both of which also were ground balancing units. But, I have run FBS 95% of the time over the past 7 years, and it's so easy to be "lazy" as a result and just let the machine "do its thing" and not think about it. The Equinox is forcing me to "think about it," again, which is a good thing. It forces me to learn!

Steve

TNSS....... no.

Here is what happens with my unit behind my house over clean ground doing auto GB. Using park 2 detect mode.
Multi freq- detector when auto balancing never goes quiet has feedback lowering and raising coil (slight).
Go to each single freq and do auto GB. Detector goes almost dead quiet when balanced.
As far as which single freq lines up with same number in window when doing auto GB using Mulit freq, seems the same of very near number is gotten using 20khz.

So using multi frequency can I do a manual adjustment GB and get Equinox to sound like it does when auto balanced in single frequency (almost dead quiet)? No, I tried adjusting GB manually only makes for more feedback. The GB number acquired doing auto GB is as quiet as my unit gets in Mulit freq lifting and raising coil. I didn't check all possible manual adjustments, but when I started departing either positive or negative from auto GB number reading, things got worse feedback wise.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2018 02:07AM by tnsharpshooter.