Not impressed with Iron Descrimination on EQ 800

I was able to get on the sanded in beaches with the EQ, E Trac and Excall. I found a lot of targets that I would have dug due to a good ID and at times a clear strong tone. 90% of my finds were ferrous and when I put the E Trac over the target it would clearly indicate it was and grunt in TTF and null on beach pattern.
I'm having a hard time understanding why the 800 in Beach 1 or even field 2 willn't descriminate iron out. Even with changing reactive and iron bias I'm getting too many rusty iron washers, screws and just chunks of rusty iron pieces on thee beach. On some of these targets I did find in 50 tones alot of the time the tone would be choppy and
if I went to all metal most of the iron but not all would go then to the neg ferrous range and not bounce into the non ferrous area. I also found this to be the case on a older home site that the 800 would ID nails all over the dial and after PP and plug dug the signal moved to the side and it was a nail. The tip was the problem as when laid on the ground it would show a ferrous target. So far I am finding a poor descrimator
and I have a problem with the way in ground iron is fooling this machine. Watch Gravedigger Max on U Tube and will see it is doing it to him. Just my experence so far. It does hit small targets well in the wet sand but the ET and my Excal 2 have no problem getting rid of the iron the 800 id's as a good target. Hope to hear I'm missing an adjustment but this MD is easy to understand and settings are easy to change on the fly. HH JR

Minelab E-trac, CTX 3030, Excalibur Versus Equinox

Short answer - those trying to turn Equinox into a light weight BBS/FBS detector are going to fail. The machines are not meant to duplicate each other. Equinox is designed to go after the AT Max and Deus market, not replace Minelabs top machines in applications where they excel.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2018 04:18PM by Steve Herschbach.

Pretty early in the game..... especially for beach hunters. If you have an Xcal...... how was it to learn those tones .... over say the CTX? Lucky.... the Xcal has a set IM/salt setting that really hates iron. There are a lot of dirt machines compared to salt water machines. They just keep getting better learning from other machines that hit the market. Not so much for water machine...... what 3 VLFs thats the real competition right now? Like Steve said there was a group of detectors this machine was designed to take on. Waters hunters may benefit here thou more than dirt diggers on smaller gold. Going to be trade offs on this one....... is it worth it for you.

My 800 is on the truck for delivery today. This is the best since the Christmas and the kids were still little. Okay, to the topic...
It is always the case when the legend precedes the life. Expectations have grown to impossible or nearly so. You can't get small gold without small aluminium tagging along. You cannot get super sensitive without getting sparky. No new machine will be the best at everything. It takes a while to learn a machine and we are still picking up on the tricks to work around the quirks. All things considered this new baby meets more wish list criteria than any other (so far). With any luck I can back this with experience tomorrow, but its been oh so trendy to make great pronouncements without a bit of experience (no, not this thread on the last sentence).

Past(or)Tom
Using a Legend, a Deus 2, an Equinox 800, a Tarsacci MDT 8000, & a few others...
with my beloved, fading Corgi, Sadie

Steve Herschbach Wrote:
------------------------------
> Short answer - those trying to turn Equinox into a
> light weight BBS/FBS detector are going to fail.

I have the feeling a lot of guys out there were hoping for what you mentioned above, Steve. And I know because I was guilty of it, myself.

I was simply hoping for an Etrac packaged in a lightweight design with a touch more speed. The waterproof aspect was nice to have, but didn't influence my buying decision one bit. I reasoned that even if it wasn't EXACTLY like the Etrac in performance, but was close enough, for everything I'd be gaining in exchange, it would be worth it.

After working with it in the field however, it was quickly apparent they were apples and oranges, night and day. Nothing "close" between the two, at all. The thing about the BBS/FBS machines is that they spoil you, to a certain degree. They are THAT good. At least when it comes to coin/beach hunting. And for me, I find it very difficult to go back to a traditional beep & dig detector with just a low/mid/high tone type of response. It's almost like going from a Ferrari to an Edsel.

I foresee two camps out there. The guys who knew precisely what the Nox was before they got it, and will be thrilled with it, and on the other end of the spectrum, hunters like me, who were hoping that the Nox retained at least some of the magic of the older BBS/FBS units, and might be disappointed to see firsthand just how stark of a difference there is between the machines.

njnydigger --

I understand what you are saying. Definitely very "different" machines -- FBS and EQ. And I LOVE me some FBS! But I wonder why you called the EQ a "traditional beep and dig detector with just a low/mid/high tone type of response?"

That is NOT how I would characterize the EQ at all. It is (and I know this is subjective) not a "traditional beep and dig detector," in my mind, but -- the objective thing I can say is that it is not correct IMO to say it has "just a low/mid/high tone response." I run my in full 50 tones, and there is a unique, nuanced language there -- and while a different "dialect," it is similar in terms of nuance and information conveyed, to FBS language, IMO. Again, different dialect, but still very rich and nuanced. Not sure why you are implying 3-tone, beep-and-dig.

Not arguing, just discussing...

Steve

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> njnydigger --
>
> I understand what you are saying. Definitely very
> "different" machines -- FBS and EQ. And I LOVE me
> some FBS! But I wonder why you called the EQ a "t
> raditional beep and dig detector with just a low/m
> id/high tone type of response?"
>
> That is NOT how I would characterize the EQ at all
> . It is (and I know this is subjective) not a "tr
> aditional beep and dig detector," in my mind, but
> -- the objective thing I can say is that it is not
> correct IMO to say it has "just a low/mid/high ton
> e response." I run my in full 50 tones, and there
> is a unique, nuanced language there -- and while a
> different "dialect," it is similar in terms of nua
> nce and information conveyed, to FBS language, IMO
> . Again, different dialect, but still very rich a
> nd nuanced. Not sure why you are implying 3-tone,
> beep-and-dig.
>
> Not arguing, just discussing...
>
> Steve

Steve, no argument at all, I understand precisely why you asked what you did

I too ran the Nox in 50 tones, and to me, the sounds were more like the CTX's - flatter, duller...whatever you'd like to call it. That's one of the primary reasons I never moved up to the CTX. On the Nox, gone we're the real high pitched tones, the extreme variance or differentiation that exists on the Explorers, SE's & Etrac. So, maybe I was a bit extreme in calling it a "beep & dig" detector, but that's almost what it felt like to me coming off the older Minelabs.

If there was indeed a way I could've replicated the tones on the 600 to sound like the Etrac, I would probably still have the machine, but as Steve was saying, you can't expect the Equinox's technology to be like the BBS/FBS.

njnydigger --

OK, Gotcha.

Yes, I know what you mean now. By "just low/mid/high" you were meaning the tones are "flatter," don't have the "warble," etc. And so there's a bit more of just "listening for a pitch." And yes, I agree with that. The "warble" nuance is not there, for sure. There are nuances, IMO -- but nuances are different than those on the E-Trac or Explorers, for sure. I get now what you were getting at. And I know what you mean as to how that's more similar to the CTX. The CTX CAN be set up to sound "similar" to the E-Trac, such that you will "understand" the CTX language if it's set up to be "like" the E-Trac, but it's stull different in the "nuance."

Makes sense now what you are saying.

Steve

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> njnydigger --
>
> OK, Gotcha.
>
> Yes, I know what you mean now. By "just low/mid/h
> igh" you were meaning the tones are "flatter," don
> 't have the "warble," etc. And so there's a bit m
> ore of just "listening for a pitch." And yes, I a
> gree with that. The "warble" nuance is not there,
> for sure. There are nuances, IMO -- but nuances a
> re different than those on the E-Trac or Explorers
> , for sure. I get now what you were getting at.
> And I know what you mean as to how that's more sim
> ilar to the CTX. The CTX CAN be set up to sound "
> similar" to the E-Trac, such that you will "unders
> tand" the CTX language if it's set up to be "like"
> the E-Trac, but it's stull different in the "nuanc
> e."
>
> Makes sense now what you are saying.
>
> Steve

Yes, the warble sound, or that flutey, watery, crinkled glass type of response. Variance. The tones on the Nox seemed flatter, more subdued, and came across - to my ears - not to have as varied of a spread pitch-wise than that of the Explorers, Etrac, etc. That was in addition to the smaller VDI range, the lessened modulation, and the jumpier numbers. When you take all of that into consideration, that's why I made the apples to oranges comparison earlier, Steve.

Again, if it was just one or two minor differences between the units, I would have lived with it and adapted. But when there's such a stark difference than from what I'm used to, and what works almost flawlessly, to lose that for some added speed or lighter weight just isn't worth it to me.

The 50 Tones can be turned up a little more on the 800 under the Advanced setting but It still would have been nice to
have that extra 10 points of conductive range with the higher tones to go with it..
5 Tones Advanced settings on the 800 really allow you to make your desired targets pop with both volume and pitch
control under more ranges.
The Equinox definitely has a different feel compared to FBS.. The CTX and E-Trac are kind of the Cadillac and the Equinox
more like a sports car.. The rides maybe going to be a little more stiff in the sports car, but it’s much quicker and I do believe more powerful
(in my ground) then the Cadillac.. It just going to take a little more practice to learn how to control it for us guys how are used to driving the Cadillac..

Bryan

It has got to do better than it is. My 300 dollar Tesoro and even an AT Pro can discriminate iron out. Not too much to expect the EQ to as well. I don't expect it to match the other MD's but it does in many ways. Just not here. It bites to get a good 18 or 19 and open plug only to find a chunk of rusty iron. Even finding small iron in the 1, 2 id range. I will be testing a great deal in the week to come and I don't want to have to go to single freq. on every target to see it its iron or a bottle cap. Looks like mine may be going on market if I continue to have this. So far it is disappointing in the way the unit discriminates. Lots crammed into 1 thru 19 but coins so far go to 19(zinc) to 35(silver dollar) and 36 up so far doesn't show many signals except on large aluminum. Need to spread it out better. IMHO

I have been following here.
I can only offer a few suggestions.
First let me say, every single detector Inhace ever used will get fooled in iron, even models costing more than Nox.

So here we go.
First does target signal on a sweep?
Versus trying to just wiggle coil or makes shorter back and forth and acquire tone.

What does meter say? Many times you see negative numbers briefly come in = likely iron,
Using AM (pushing horse shoe button) and studying suspect targets audio provided.
In the very middle of signal is audio corrupted, if so, good chance of iron.


Use of pinpoint can be used. Using pinpoint if you hear a whine when you use and get over target, this usually signifies big target. I am not talking about trying to size by coil moving coil around here either.

How muffled or dull does tone sound. Duller sounding good clue for iron.

I run my unit with iron bias 0. And hunt some real bad places iron and nails wise. As time has built with me using my unit, I have learned to cope, recognize the difference between falses, iron wrap CW good signals.
Does this mean I still don't get fooled? Nope
I get fooled with all my detectors and I also did with Etrac and CTX too.

Oh, forgot to say, Nox has tendency to give a high squeal sounds as the coil comes off the iron sometimes. Beginner Nox users may try and think this is a good signal.

I have ordered another Nox 800 unit. I like mine I have right now.
Looking forward to smallest coil.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 05:27PM by tnsharpshooter.

tnsharpshooter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> (pspuahing >


What does this mean?

El

it means tnss does not bother to read his message before posting it.

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?

Got it. Thanks.

This thread sheds new light on the Equinox and its discrimination abilities. Maybe I keep using my Compass Judge II on the river foreshore.

I was waiting before purchase for more information
Glad I did!



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 04:32PM by Dirt Dog.

njnydigger --

OK, Gotcha.

Yes, I know what you mean now. By "just low/mid/high" you were meaning the tones are "flatter," don't have the "warble," etc. And so there's a bit more of just "listening for a pitch." And yes, I agree with that. The "warble" nuance is not there, for sure. There are nuances, IMO -- but nuances are different than those on the E-Trac or Explorers, for sure. I get now what you were getting at. And I know what you mean as to how that's more similar to the CTX. The CTX CAN be set up to sound "similar" to the E-Trac, such that you will "understand" the CTX language if it's set up to be "like" the E-Trac, but it's stull different in the "nuance."

Makes sense now what you are saying.

Steve

"Still don't have mine and looking fwd to it HUGELY.

ShovelNose: you'll have to walk B4 you can run..you can't / won't master Iron Disc on anything new in a few hrs!

I'm sure (for those who might want to) you can make [ it sound ] like an E Trac or a CTX if you wanted, but why would you? It's a New system with it's own nuances?"

Elbert Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> tnsharpshooter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
> > (pspuahing >
>
>
> What does this mean?
>
> El

I edited to pushing.

Des D Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Still don't have mine and looking fwd to it HUGEL
> Y.
>
> ShovelNose: you'll have to walk B4 you can run..yo
> u can't / won't master Iron Disc on anything new i
> n a few hrs!
>
> I'm sure (for those who might want to) you can mak
> e [ it sound ] like an E Trac or a CTX if you want
> ed, but why would you? It's a New system with it's
> own nuances?"


Des------How do you know you can make the Equinox sound like an Etrac?-----You stated you haven't received yours yet.----Have you borrowed or tried a friends to see you can do this?-----Just curious as I would REALLY like it if you indeed could make it sound like an Etrac.-----I'm just am old timer set in his ways I guess! -------Del

Understood. Good points, and I agree with you on the tones. Again, there's "nuance" in the tones, but entirely different in some ways (that you laid out) than FBS audio.

I REALLY like the EQ as a "complementary" machine to FBS -- it seems STRONG in places where FBS might be weaker, and vice-versa; if you asked me if I'd ditch FBS for the Equinox, however, that's a different question entirely...

Steve

njnydigger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> steveg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > njnydigger --
> >
> > OK, Gotcha.
> >
> > Yes, I know what you mean now. By "just low/mid
> /h
> > igh" you were meaning the tones are "flatter," d
> on
> > 't have the "warble," etc. And so there's a bit
> m
> > ore of just "listening for a pitch." And yes, I
> a
> > gree with that. The "warble" nuance is not ther
> e,
> > for sure. There are nuances, IMO -- but nuances
> a
> > re different than those on the E-Trac or Explore
> rs
> > , for sure. I get now what you were getting at.
> > And I know what you mean as to how that's more s
> im
> > ilar to the CTX. The CTX CAN be set up to sound
> "
> > similar" to the E-Trac, such that you will "unde
> rs
> > tand" the CTX language if it's set up to be "lik
> e"
> > the E-Trac, but it's stull different in the "nua
> nc
> > e."
> >
> > Makes sense now what you are saying.
> >
> > Steve
>
> Yes, the warble sound, or that flutey, watery,
> crinkled glass type of response. Variance. The ton
> es on the Nox seemed flatter, more subdued, and ca
> me across - to my ears - not to have as varied of
> a spread pitch-wise than that of the Explorers, Et
> rac, etc. That was in addition to the smaller VDI
> range, the lessened modulation, and the jumpier nu
> mbers. When you take all of that into consideratio
> n, that's why I made the apples to oranges compari
> son earlier, Steve.
>
> Again, if it was just one or two minor differences
> between the units, I would have lived with it and
> adapted. But when there's such a stark difference
> than from what I'm used to, and what works almost
> flawlessly, to lose that for some added speed or l
> ighter weight just isn't worth it to me.

Del,

It seems like you can get "closer" to FBS response by running low recovery speed combined with a slow sweep speed. Much less "machine-gunny" at low recovery speed, and more "drawn out" tones. But, I do not think you can replicate AT ALL the warbly, tinkly, broken-glassy type of sound on a deep coin. The "variance" njnydigger mentioned...

One reason I think that is, is that I think somewhat "paradoxically" that it's the FBS tendency to have some tiny "instability" at depth in terms of ID number -- i.e. ID numbers varying by a digit or two (but ONLY a digit or two) at depth, that is part of what leads to that "tinkly" or "warbly" sound. It's the "audio signature" of a dime varying rapidly between a 44 and 45 ID number. But, if from a design perspective you "set" a machine to try and output ONE NUMBER on a target, when possible (through "averaging" or something), or if you "compress" your ID scale to reduce ID number bounces, then while that COULD be considered an "IMPROVEMENT" in terms of ID "stability," it "takes away" that little up-and-down rapid bouncing of ID number on a deep coin, and the corresponding "warbling" of the audio.

Probably not the whole story, but that's part of what my brain has been thinking, FWIW.

Steve

D&P-OR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Des D Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "Still don't have mine and looking fwd to it HUG
> EL
> > Y.
> >
> > ShovelNose: you'll have to walk B4 you can run..
> yo
> > u can't / won't master Iron Disc on anything new
> i
> > n a few hrs!
> >
> > I'm sure (for those who might want to) you can m
> ak
> > e [ it sound ] like an E Trac or a CTX if you wa
> nt
> > ed, but why would you? It's a New system with it
> 's
> > own nuances?"
>
>
> Des------How do you know you can make the Equinox
> sound like an Etrac?-----You stated you haven't re
> ceived yours yet.----Have you borrowed or tried a
> friends to see you can do this?-----Just curious a
> s I would REALLY like it if you indeed could make
> it sound like an Etrac.-----I'm just am old timer
> set in his ways I guess! -------Del

You will never get the Equinox to sound like an E-Trac just because it’s upper limit is 500 Hz compared to
the E-Trac at something like 1000 or 1200 Hz if I remember correctly..
Other then that I do like the Equinox tones better.. Still lots of information but cleaner..
I would like them to expand the Audio..

As far as ID at depth.. FBS might have a tighter ID number range, for example 12-44 12-46 on a dime where the Equinox
Will be from 23 - 28 with an occasional 31... I am going to dig that all day long... This is what I experienced with the Equinox
on my first hunt.. It held copper and silver in its range clear to 10 inches.. The key is that it did not drop in to the tab or iron range
like most Detectors do in my ground.. Very clear high tones in all directions. Your not going to pass those up just because the number bounce..
At least I’m not..

Bryan



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2018 07:44PM by Cabin Fever.

Cabin Fever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You will never get the Equinox to sound like an E-
> Trac just because it’s upper limit is 500 Hz compa
> red to
> the E-Trac at something like 1000 or 1200 Hz if I
> remember correctly..
> Other then that I do like the Equinox tones better
> .. Still lots of information but cleaner..
> I would like them to expand the Audio..
>
> As far as ID at depth.. FBS might have a tighter I
> D number range, for example 12-44 12-46 on a dime
> where the Equinox
> Will be from 23 - 28 with an occasional 31... I a
> m going to dig that all day long... This is what
> I experienced with the Equinox
> on my first hunt.. It held copper and silver in it
> s range clear to 10 inches.. The key is that it d
> id not drop in to the tab or iron range
> like most Detectors do in my ground.. Very clear
> high tones in all directions. Your not going to p
> ass those up just because the number bounce..
> At least I’m not..
>
> Bryan

Bryan,

Totally agree on the ID. Nothing "bad" about the ID on the EQ, just not as "tight" as I expected. But yes, it always seems to be in the right "place," giving you "dig" info, all the way down to max depth.

Steve

Cabin Fever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You will never get the Equinox to sound like an E-
> Trac just because it’s upper limit is 500 Hz compa
> red to
> the E-Trac at something like 1000 or 1200 Hz if I
> remember correctly..
> Other then that I do like the Equinox tones better
> .. Still lots of information but cleaner..
> I would like them to expand the Audio..
>
> As far as ID at depth.. FBS might have a tighter I
> D number range, for example 12-44 12-46 on a dime
> where the Equinox
> Will be from 23 - 28 with an occasional 31... I a
> m going to dig that all day long... This is what
> I experienced with the Equinox
> on my first hunt.. It held copper and silver in it
> s range clear to 10 inches.. The key is that it d
> id not drop in to the tab or iron range
> like most Detectors do in my ground.. Very clear
> high tones in all directions. Your not going to p
> ass those up just because the number bounce..
> At least I’m not..
>
> Bryan

Believe it or not, the Nox actually has more in common with the Safari than it does the Etrac. I swung a Safari for years, and I LOVED that machine. It was my entree into the FBS world. Here's what I mean about the comparison...

Like the Nox, the Safari also had a tighter range, with it too maxing out at 40. Again, like the Nox, the Safari didn't have any FE/CO info or reading, it was simply the one conductive number. Yet...

Unlike the Nox, the numbers were nowhere near as jumpy, and the Safari had/has the same EXACT tones as the Etrac does. Did they (Minelab) perhaps incorporate more of the Safari into the Equinox? I obviously have no way of knowing, but it seems like that to me.

Steveg, I concur. As a compliment to the Etrac/CTX, it would be a KILLER combo. Or, for relic hunters or those who detect in carpeted iron type sites, the Nox is going to clean out a lot of goodies. I think the biggest adjustment (as Steve H. said) will be for deep coin or beach hunters trying to turn it into a lighter weight FBS/BBS machine.

Cabin Fever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You will never get the Equinox to sound like an E-
> Trac just because it’s upper limit is 500 Hz compa
> red to
> the E-Trac at something like 1000 or 1200 Hz if I
> remember correctly..
> Other then that I do like the Equinox tones better
> .. Still lots of information but cleaner..
> I would like them to expand the Audio..
>
> As far as ID at depth.. FBS might have a tighter I
> D number range, for example 12-44 12-46 on a dime
> where the Equinox
> Will be from 23 - 28 with an occasional 31... I a
> m going to dig that all day long... This is what
> I experienced with the Equinox
> on my first hunt.. It held copper and silver in it
> s range clear to 10 inches.. The key is that it d
> id not drop in to the tab or iron range
> like most Detectors do in my ground.. Very clear
> high tones in all directions. Your not going to p
> ass those up just because the number bounce..
> At least I’m not..
>
> Bryan


Bingo Bryan.
Everyone seems gets wrapped around the axle with ID of Nox.
How about this,

Don't you have to locate a target before you can see the ID?
So folks need to get "ID on the brain" and put it aside, and have instead " locate on the brain".

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Del,
>
> It seems like you can get "closer" to FBS response
> by running low recovery speed combined with a slow
> sweep speed. Much less "machine-gunny" at low rec
> overy speed, and more "drawn out" tones. But, I d
> o not think you can replicate AT ALL the warbly, t
> inkly, broken-glassy type of sound on a deep coin.
> The "variance" njnydigger mentioned...
>
> One reason I think that is, is that I think somewh
> at "paradoxically" that it's the FBS tendency to h
> ave some tiny "instability" at depth in terms of I
> D number -- i.e. ID numbers varying by a digit or
> two (but ONLY a digit or two) at depth, that is pa
> rt of what leads to that "tinkly" or "warbly" soun
> d. It's the "audio signature" of a dime varying r
> apidly between a 44 and 45 ID number. But, if fro
> m a design perspective you "set" a machine to try
> and output ONE NUMBER on a target, when possible (
> through "averaging" or something), or if you "comp
> ress" your ID scale to reduce ID number bounces, t
> hen while that COULD be considered an "IMPROVEMENT
> " in terms of ID "stability," it "takes away" that
> little up-and-down rapid bouncing of ID number on
> a deep coin, and the corresponding "warbling" of t
> he audio.
>
> Probably not the whole story, but that's part of w
> hat my brain has been thinking, FWIW.
>
> Steve
>
> D&P-OR Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Des D Wrote:
> > ------------------------------------------------
> --
> > -----
> > > "Still don't have mine and looking fwd to it H
> UG
> > EL
> > > Y.
> > >
> > > ShovelNose: you'll have to walk B4 you can run
> ..
> > yo
> > > u can't / won't master Iron Disc on anything n
> ew
> > i
> > > n a few hrs!
> > >
> > > I'm sure (for those who might want to) you can
> m
> > ak
> > > e [ it sound ] like an E Trac or a CTX if you
> wa
> > nt
> > > ed, but why would you? It's a New system with
> it
> > 's
> > > own nuances?"
> >
> >
> > Des------How do you know you can make the Equino
> x
> > sound like an Etrac?-----You stated you haven't
> re
> > ceived yours yet.----Have you borrowed or tried
> a
> > friends to see you can do this?-----Just curious
> a
> > s I would REALLY like it if you indeed could mak
> e
> > it sound like an Etrac.-----I'm just am old time
> r
> > set in his ways I guess! -------Del

Del,

Maybe not the 'E Trac', but definitely applicable to be "almost like the CTX"

Gordon Heritage in a UK magazine article outlined a dozen or so steps to alter the Settings to 'almost replicate', the sounds of the CTX
It's got 50 Tones: E Trac doesn't so, it might not be possible (but I'd give it a good try)
I don't have permission to (nor would I) reproduce Copyright writer's privilege here.
His settings allow users to use Multi-Tone in All Metal.

Des D

Sounds to me like the detector needs some updates. I'll wait for that or a better detector from someone else. Happy hunting to all.

goodmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sounds to me like the detector needs some updates.
> I'll wait for that or a better detector from someo
> ne else. Happy hunting to all.

Same here.