CZ3D au21x Mod Demo of Discing Gold Out of Foil

Electronics is all about manipulating electricity to do a task. Correct me if I'm wrong. Is a computer really smart? No, electricity is manipulated to do what man wants it to do according to principals. So, if the unit was altered to somehow tell foil from a ring/gold by whatever means, that's what all electronics does. What I'm saying is, that you could say ALL electronic gadgets are trickery.....Hope my point is coming across, no word smith here.

Tom- Indeed you may be able to do your “A/B” test however Sir, you are still NOT replicating what the au21x is able to do.

Because.....

First...The au21x is doing all this in (1) mode, the ENHANCED mode, not (2) modes. Let’s be realistic Sir, w the abundance of foil in the ground who wants to switch back and forth testing every piece of foil???

Second...Can you also replicate the see through tech that I have demonstrated with the gold in the foil?

Now, you have one valid point regarding the target size of foil not always reading as foil. Yes, this is true however, let’s be fair Tom, the foil targets used in my demo are generally most of the
foil sizes you find anyway!

Example, last Sunday I took my 1266x Magnum to a area I’ve been pounding trying to get the last bit of non fe and targets.

I did one pass of approximately 300ft & 2hrs, I dug over a half a dozen foil targets and NOT one was any bigger than the ones in my video.

Again Sir, as I keep saying the mod is NOT perfect and has its limitations.

Aaron

TARSACCI - “Digging deeper, BEHIND the competition!”
[forums.tarsaccisales.com]

Very thin non-ferrous targets like flat foil can be fairly reliably ID'd with most any detector by bobbing the coil, particularly using a concentric. The vertical TID will be much lower on a screened machine or disc out completely on an audio only machine (depending on disc setting). This of course does no good on wadded up aluminum, pop tabs , etc. I know I might be passing up very thin broken rings or fine chains as well but don't dig the ones that go low when I bob the coil. Many pounds of junk have brought me to this conclusion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2019 03:53AM by dgerst.

Aaron, you say:

"First...The au21x is doing all this in (1) mode, the ENHANCED mode, not (2) modes. Let’s be realistic Sir, w the abundance of foil in the ground who wants to switch back and forth testing every piece of foil???...." "

Odd that you acknowledge that ... yes.... other TID machines can be made to replicate your video . But apparently *only if* the user doesn't have to "switch back and forth" between modes ? I kind of lost ya there. The "switching back and forth between modes" is merely (in the case of your video) watching the needle to see where the needle lands. Right ? Ok, so what's the difference between that, and the method (that you acknowledge) I can do with other TID machines ? Whether it be via a cursor or needle bounce, or tone, or named-category (foil, nickel, etc...) . The net result is the same . So I don't get the "switch back and forth" line-of-logic. I could simply program my other TID machine to be silent on the un-wanted (foil) targets. Ok, no "switching back and forth". So .... what's your point ?

.... Second...Can you also replicate the see through tech that I have demonstrated with the gold in the foil?

Most certainly. In fact, this only accentuates and furthers what I'm saying. If you combine (meld/mesh/smunch) objects next to each other, you will merely push the TID even higher-yet. To further achieve the notching/enhancement objective. The two-objects "average" together to simply put it further from the foil category. What is surprising about this ?

" ....the foil targets used in my demo are generally most of the foil sizes you find anyway!...."

Right ! The "sizes you find anyway" comment is merely a function of the age-old "ring-enhancement" concept. Ie.: the commonly recurring "junk items" you/we tend to "find anyways" . Are .... yes .... typically recurring. Ie.: very few gold rings read down into the whispy foil of your video TID excercise. Granted ! Ok. But why can't someone simply accomplish the same thing by simply re-classifying and re-calibrating (ie.: cherry-picking and TID ring-enchancing ) on any other machine that's equally been available since 1984-ish ? And heck, I can even call it a "mod".


... Again Sir, as I keep saying the mod is NOT perfect and has its limitations.... .


And again, as I said, such language is the "perfect out". For if/when anyone ever goes out into-the-field to test any-such-system that purports to tell "aluminum apart from gold". No matter how much junk they dig, they simply need to fall back on this "out" verbiage. Right ?

Which as I said before, I/we are not asking for "perfection". But sheeesk, when it comes to the point of being "random odds" , and nothing-more-than-notching : Can't we all agree that .... it's not telling aluminum apart from gold ?

5/28/19, 9:26am: Nasa-tom agrees that this is indeed "notching".


On 5/27/19, 6am, Francais asks:


Interesting, why have not you tried with aluminum foils folded into balls?


Aaron says, # 5/27/19, 04:01PM answers :


" ..... Aluminum balled up still is going to read aluminum.... "


Yet dgerst says, @ 5/29/19, 7:50 pm: " This of course does no good on wadded up aluminum..... "


Is anyone else here beginning to smell notching and ring-enhancement as the answer to this video ? Versus "telling aluminum apart from gold" ?

As this thread has simply turned into an argumentative pissing match and dissection of semantics, I would relish Tom Dankowski posting a bit on what his invention does (without letting the preverbal cat of of the bag of course).

What say ye Tom D ?

Okay

Op you ask me to reproduce the same test with equinox, it's quite impossible since I do not have exactly the same aluminum foil, I have no 10k gold, I only have 5 or 6 rings 14 k and they are not in the range of aluminum.

However I have many 18k jewels that are in the range of your aluminum foil of your video, if you pass them in front of the coil of your modified cz3d I am convinced that it would give the sound of your aluminum fois Or would it be necessary to explain to me by what magic the opposite is possible?

Now since you have an equinox, and if you have kept your aluminum tip, let us know the vdi as well as the vdi jewels of the video please.
It's not hard to do, and after the results, we'll be able to clear that up.

If for example your earring has a vdi of 3 on the nox one of your foils to the same vdi, then I am definitely interested in your machine.

When folding one of the papers, putting it in a ball or any other shape, you all know that it changes the sound and the vdi.
You tell us that "it's still aluminum", so please show it to us.

I apologize in advance if one of my remarks crumples, the Google translate is not able to transcribe the nuances of the conversation.
Please note that I do not accuse you of cheating or lying, on the contrary I ask you to believe.

If your modified is able to differentiate with the sounds of your video a gold jewelry, an aluminum that would have exactly the same number vdi on an equinox, I buy it.

Could it be that designer Tom NASA could tell us more?

Thank you

All I smell is a lot of ego from the "always have to have the last say and be the one who is more right" mentality. Or as Cal accurately said, a pissing match. Man, sometimes you just let things go and move on.

Agreed.

You can call it what you want, all I know is works pretty darn good, and it’s unique.

Respectfully,

Aaron

TARSACCI - “Digging deeper, BEHIND the competition!”
[forums.tarsaccisales.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2019 11:44PM by Aaron.

Aaron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Agreed. I provided the video and the demo.
>
> You can call it what you want, all I know is works
> pretty darn good, and it’s unique.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Aaron

That’s all ?
Can you show a gold jewerly who have the same vdi number of an aluminium foil on your equinox ?
Then your au21 diffenciate this two things.

Please

Aaron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Agreed.
>
>


Uhhh,,, Aaron, I just *happened* to catch your post before you edited it. Something to the effect of "I provided the video" (ie.: as if to substantiate the proof of the debate-at-hand). Right ? Curious why you would have edited and changed that ? I have a suspicion that you saw-through-to-the end.

Here's why I suspect you edited it. Because I would have merely (as the course has been here) have pointed out that ANYONE ELSE (as you seem to concur) could have replicated the same video, on any # of TID machines.

Oh but wait, let me guess. That would be a:


" .... argumentative pissing match and dissection of semantics "....

and

" .... "always have to have the last say and be the one who is more right" mentality


Or .... perhaps ... it's just maybe a discussion of what's really going on ? (say it isn't so)

If you have a video to replicate the au21x, show it.

Otherwise, lets consider the matter closed.

Aaron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you have a video to replicate the au21x, show i
> t.
>
> Otherwise, lets consider the matter closed.

Before I knock myself silly making a video (I'm not as techno/computerized fast with video hosting as some folks here) :

a) I thought you already acknowledged it was possible ? By mere user adjustment setting/options/disc-settings on other machines. Why then are you now challenging whether it or not such a video can be done ?

b) If you are now flip-flopping and saying I can't make such a video (with my Exp. II), then ... I need to have a gentlemen's agreement : If/when I provide this video, showing exactly what your video shows (option "A" and option "B", call it "mod's", call it whatever you want), then what ? Are you willing to come on here and admit that .... alas ... your mod is not telling the difference between gold and aluminum ?

Otherwise, my incentive to go through the video hoops wilts-my-willy. So I need a gentlemen's agreement from you, before I start. Agreed ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2019 01:49AM by Tom_in_CA.

And to rise-to-the-challenge (make a video), I'll go a step further and state exactly what my video would show :

Gather 5 or 6 foil objects. Gather 5 or 6 gold objects. Show the viewer that with a "program A" : They all hit on a range I will have classified as "foil" (a grouping-title). Then .... without any editing or lapse-in-camera footage, I will change to "program B". Lo & behold : All the gold items , out of those 10 to 12 targets, will now hit in ranges I will call "nickel" and "tab".

Do you doubt that this is possible ? With nothing more than user options on a machine like the Exp. II ?

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And to rise-to-the-challenge (make a video), I'll
> go a step further and state exactly what my video
> would show :
>
> Gather 5 or 6 foil objects. Gather 5 or 6 gold ob
> jects. Show the viewer that with a "program A" :
> They all hit on a range I will have classified as
> "foil" (a grouping-title). Then .... without a
> ny editing or lapse-in-camera footage, I will chan
> ge to "program B". Lo & behold : All the gold i
> tems , out of those 10 to 12 targets, will now hit
> in ranges I will call "nickel" and "tab".
>
> Do you doubt that this is possible ? With nothi
> ng more than user options on a machine like the Ex
> p. II ?


The problem is that you're entire assumption of the au21x is predicated on it's simply notching. I suspect there's more going on than notching (I could be wrong). I doubt Tom D. would waste his time to create such a simple mod, he's not about to put his name on a LRL snake oil type of smoke and mirrors type of shenanigans.

Hopefully Tom D will be able to comment on the au21x.

Cal_cobra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I
> suspect there's more going on than notching (I cou
> ld be wrong).

Much respected response. And if I am wrong (I could be wrong) then so-be-it.

If I can make a video , that shows the same outcome as the OP's' video, then I am assuming that it shows that: All that is at play is: Notching . Aka ring-enhancement programs. Right ?

If this mod could tell gold from aluminum it would be selling like hot cakes to this day. Most everyone on this forum would have (or want) this modded machine and it would be pricey. So why, if it works as well as claimed, isn't everyone knocking NASA Tom's door down to get one or have one modded? Doesn't seem like there are many of them. Why? Why didn't the manufacturer of this machine buy the rights to the mod and manufacture this machine and sell it as the one and only machine that can tell gold from aluminum? It would be revolutionary.


Dean

Personally, I do not wait for him to distinguish all the gold from all the aluminum, such a machine is not ready to exist.

I come back again with the equinox Since it is the sensor of the moment for the beach and Aaron owns it, he could easily give me the answer but he seems to ignore my request.

So I'm waiting to see if this detector is able to distinguish a gold from an aluminum that have the same ID on the nox in the range 1,2 or 3.

This is the range of a lot of jewelry 18k such as chains, some crosses, earrings ... and a lot of aluminum foil.

Is this mod only able to detect a chain ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2019 08:06AM by Français.

For one, the cz3d has no notch (in) notch(out) that is adjustable from the outside, it has disc that turns off the sound. I don't know what is needed to make the au21x high tone on gold jewelry, but Tom made it happen....probably has something to do with the cz's ability to high tone on mostly all American coinage, from the half eagle, penny, dime, quarter, half, and dollar...that he also made happen...adding a fourth tone to the cz line.

ozzie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For one, the cz3d has no notch (in) notch(out) tha
> t is adjustable from the outside, it has disc that
> turns off the sound. I don't know what is needed t
> o make the au21x high tone on gold jewelry, but To
> m made it happen....probably has something to do w
> ith the cz's ability to high tone on mostly all Am
> erican coinage, from the half eagle, penny, dime,
> quarter, half, and dollar...that he also made happ
> en...adding a fourth tone to the cz line.

You're right: They're not user selections "from the outside". But someone can go to the inside, and re-calibrate the TID settings. That's merely re-assigning where the TID settings fall on, with the needle. No different that simply playing around with the accept/reject of ANY target-ID machine. And we can call that a "mod". It's not telling aluminum apart from gold. Unless you define "notching" as "telling aluminum apart from gold".

Gerry at Gerry's Detectors basically does this "mod" on an X-Terra 705 in this YouTube video - Minelab X-Terra 705 settings for hunting jewelry.

At first glance you would think that the 705 must be the greatest gold ring hunter on the planet and that it can tell gold from aluminum. Nothing more than some notching. On machines with assignable tones you could even have the un-regected "gold" bins give a higher tone.

Dean

bado1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerry at Gerry's Detectors basically does this "mo
> d" on an X-Terra 705 in this YouTube video - Minel
> ab X-Terra 705 settings for hunting jewelry.
>
> At first glance you would think that the 705 must
> be the greatest gold ring hunter on the planet and
> that it can tell gold from aluminum. Nothing more
> than some notching. On machines with assignable to
> nes you could even have the un-regected "gold" bin
> s give a higher tone.
>
> Dean


Good post.

I feel forced to nearly divulge certain IP. Let me just say (amplify) a couple of things. There is a phase shift angle differential that the CZ platform can employ (IP information withheld)..... that lends itself to a superior ability to alter..... then capitalize on this delta. Then..... add in a certain 'Notch' window...… and you have a design that can ID 'trash' with a 21X better ratio. The Au-21X does not ID trash 210X better. It does not ID trash 2.1X better. It is 21X better. So...…. it is not 'perfect'. This is to say; it has it's attributes...….and limitations. It can NOT read a target as: "ALUMINUM". It can NOT read a target as: "GOLD". It does start to touch the tip-of-the-iceberg on a density delta. So far...…. I have only found the CZ platform to lend itself..... to do such. The best I could make a MXT was: Au-13X. The best I could make a F75 was: Au-11X. The EQX..... also a Au-13X. Other platforms...… did not fair as well.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I feel forced to nearly divulge certain IP. Let me
> just say (amplify) a couple of things. There is a
> phase shift angle differential that the CZ platfor
> m can employ (IP information withheld)..... that l
> ends itself to a superior ability to alter..... th
> en capitalize on this delta. Then..... add in a ce
> rtain 'Notch' window...… and you have a design tha
> t can ID 'trash' with a 21X better ratio. The Au-2
> 1X does not ID trash 210X better. It does not ID t
> rash 2.1X better. It is 21X better. So...…. it is
> not 'perfect'. This is to say; it has it's attribu
> tes...….and limitations. It can NOT read a target
> as: "ALUMINUM". It can NOT read a target as: "GOLD
> ". It does start to touch the tip-of-the-iceberg o
> n a density delta. So far...…. I have only found t
> he CZ platform to lend itself..... to do such. The
> best I could make a MXT was: Au-13X. The best I co
> uld make a F75 was: Au-11X. The EQX..... also a Au
> -13X. Other platforms...… did not fair as well.


Tom thanks for sharing what you could on the mod. I figured there was more to it than a notching scheme as was repeatedly being bantered on the thread.

“Density Delta” That ain’t a term from some Corps of Engineer’s dam project. It’s one of the possible lights at the end of the tunnel of detector progress.

Thanks Tom. I once asked Dave Johnson about a specialized ring finder based on conductivity AND density or form factor. He said there were ways to do that but that engineers get paid to design stuff that Marketing can sell and he didn’t reckon that that would rise to the top of anybody’s list. Since Dave designed the CZ, maybe he had good reason to know about the “ways”.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> .... There is a phase shift angle differential .....


Which, in laymen's language, simply means "discrimination". Ok


> ..... and you have a design that can ID 'trash' with a 21X better ratio....

Well, sure. And isn't that the improvement that a person gets when he does "ring enhancement" programs ? Ie.: the same improvement level of passing the most commonly recurring trash items ? Which .... like you say ... isn't "telling aluminum apart from gold". But that ... yes .... is going to properly reject a higher ratio of trash.

And I think we'd all agree that if a person is hunting in a zone filled with aluminum camp-fire nuggets and/or can-slaw, that .... it becomes next to worthless. But yes: It does work if your main enemy is A) small gumwrapper type foil, and B ) uniform round tabs . Then ... sure .... a person notches out *just* those #'s, and then yes: has a better ratio of gold vs aluminum. But again, this is merely "notching". Nothing wrong with that.

> ...... So far...…. I have only found the CZ platform to lend itself..... to do such.....


When you say "to do such", I assume that the "such" is to accomplish what was shown in the OP's video. Right ? Then : Do you agree that someone could take a humble XLT or Spectrum and/or any other # of programmable TID machines, and accomplish exactly what was shown in that video . Do you disagree with that ?

I don't know if I can program labels (eg.: "foil" and "Nickel", etc...) But I can certainly take slots of #'s, and do edits for the assigned tones and #'s . Thus what would be the difference between that, and the video ?

If someone were to take those 10 or 12 targets, shown in the video, and put them on a wider-expanded TID scale (like an XLT or CTX, etc...) there would indeed be subtle differences in the TID's. Right ? Then all that a person needs to do is : Isolate the differences in the foil, vs the gold, for the given-select-sampling of targets. Then develop a disc. program to accept one group (lumping it into "foil"), while accepting the other group (lumping them into nickel or tab). This is the age old time-honored trick of notching. Aka : Ring enhancement, etc.....

It is hard for me to comment beyond this, because you are saying "IP information withheld". But all I know is: Many machines can replicate the video, given some user-selection choices, and walk-away with the same results.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2019 08:46PM by Tom_in_CA.

Do you have information that goes in the direction of going deeper into the delta density iceberg?

Forgive me, when you say mxt, eqx at 13x, do you want to say that you can modified them too?

But in the end concretely, in practice on the ground, what changes the modification 21x?
What is the difference between 13x and 21x?

Sorry but I do not understand what's going on inside the machines, I'm just looking for the best to detect on aluminum-filled tracks.

How can i do to have modify a cz3d by yourself?

[youtu.be]

Tom in CA;

We can not be sure that we can reproduce the test of the op with another machine since the op does not want to give us the TID number of these targets.
 
It is however very easy for him to communicate us TIDs of his eqx or other machine that he owns.

Maybe yes, Tom NASA could change something in relation to the density, in this case it's very easy to prove,
That op shows us a target in gold and aluminum with the same TID, then passes the targets in front of the coil of his au21.

I do not know when this change was made, but if it really worked that way, it would be much better known.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2019 09:10PM by Français.