Does the D2 infringe any of Dimitar's Tarsacci Patents ?

If Dimitar did get his patents which were pending sorted does the XP D2 infringe on any of these ? it seems that the performance increases of the D2 over existing units is because of the separate salt balance that it has like the Tarsacci MDT8000 unit uses.
Maybe Dimitar only got the patent (if still not pending) for single frequency separate salt balance (Mixed Domain?) and XP have filed for the multi frequency patent? or is Mixed Domain something else other than just separate salt balance ?

sanjuro Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If Dimitar did get his patents which were pending
> sorted does the XP D2 infringe on any of these ? i
> t seems that the performance increases of the D2 o
> ver existing units is because of the separate salt
> balance that it has like the Tarsacci MDT8000 unit
> uses.
> Maybe Dimitar only got the patent (if still not pe
> nding) for single frequency separate salt balance
> (Mixed Domain?) and XP have filed for the multi fr
> equency patent? or is Mixed Domain something else
> other than just separate salt balance ?


Interesting observation, following.

The Tarsacci uses time-domain sampling & processing to look at exponential decays. Most multifrequency designs use frequency-domain processing to extract phase information. The closest I've seen to time-domain processing is in the BBS/Sovereign design but even there it appears that the time-domainish sampling method is used to produce phase info, not decay info.

I would expect XP to have stuck with the well-known for a first MF design. But maybe not, maybe they couldn't get the performance they wanted and jumped into the time domain. If so, the problem Dimitar would have is showing infringement. I am certain that, like the Deus, the Deus II uses direct sampling which means that even the demodulation is done in software, not hardware. So there is nothing to look at unless you rip the code from the processor and decompile it to assembly. Then you have the excruciatingly painful task of figuring out what the assembly code is doing. Decompiled assembly does not reveal any original program info like function names, variable names, or comments. It's like taking a book, converting it to a foreign language where you know maybe 20 words, removing all the punctuation, and scrambling the order of the chapters. Then trying to read it.

The Patent might make sense to those that understand it

[patents.justia.com]

Geotech Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Tarsacci uses time-domain sampling & processin
> g to look at exponential decays. Most multifrequen
> cy designs use frequency-domain processing to extr
> act phase information. The closest I've seen to ti
> me-domain processing is in the BBS/Sovereign desig
> n but even there it appears that the time-domainis
> h sampling method is used to produce phase info, n
> ot decay info.
>
> I would expect XP to have stuck with the well-know
> n for a first MF design. But maybe not, maybe they
> couldn't get the performance they wanted and jumpe
> d into the time domain. If so, the problem Dimitar
> would have is showing infringement. I am certain t
> hat, like the Deus, the Deus II uses direct sampli
> ng which means that even the demodulation is done
> in software, not hardware. So there is nothing to
> look at unless you rip the code from the processor
> and decompile it to assembly. Then you have the ex
> cruciatingly painful task of figuring out what the
> assembly code is doing. Decompiled assembly does n
> ot reveal any original program info like function
> names, variable names, or comments. It's like taki
> ng a book, converting it to a foreign language whe
> re you know maybe 20 words, removing all the punct
> uation, and scrambling the order of the chapters.
> Then trying to read it.

Very well explained and well stated. I was thinking it would take reverse engineering to figure out if Dimitar’s patent had been infringed, and from what I gathered from your post, that’s true.

I will also echo what Mr Herschbach said on the other forum; I doubt XP would try to do this in the first place.

My understanding is the Deus II has Salt SENSITIVITY. The Tarsacci MDT has Salinity(Salt) BALANCE. I think people are conflating the two terms. Thy seem to be two separate approaches. XP's Salt Sensitivity is only available in the Beach & Diving programs. The MDT uses it's Salinity Balance as an integral part of setting the detector up for the ground conditions whether beach or inland.

Chris

Chris --

You MAY be right, but I'm not sure that just the use of different TERMS, means that they are separate APPROACHES. Look at "reactivity" on the Deus, and "recovery" on the Equinox...

Steve

I think the technology used is different. The MDT is using adjustable Time Domain in it's approach to the salt masking effect. XP's appears to be a selective Gain control.

Chris

Steve Have you been out with your Tarsacci lately?

Chris

It is indeed "eye-opening" to see a lot of things in the XP........that were Tarsacci maiden-voyages.... 'initial' launches. You can bet XP "looked" at the Tarsacci; yet, they are TOO creative/stubborn/passionate to simply (merely) 'copy' the Tarsacci. If XP can do it 'differently'......they will. If they can do it 'differently AND better'.......they definitely will. ((( I still 'question' the attributes/detriments of Deus-2 using 'Notch' to notch out coke/hot-rocks.......[[[and subsequently: good targets]]] ))).

That's one of the things about XP I really respect. They don't just play follow the leader. They are always trying to innovate.

Chris --

I suspect you are likely correct (that XP is likely not doing "time domain" things), but that's just my speculating so who knows. I just wanted to toss that out there, i.e. that terms don't necessary mean much. But, you already knew that, so...

Anyway, no, I haven't had the MDT out lately. Last few hunts have been Equinox hunts, as the guys I'm hunting with have been wanting to hit mostly old building "tear-outs" lately, and those sites are not at all conducive to me using the Tarsacci (especially while still in "learning" mode). I've had it with me each hunt, holding out the possibility of hitting a couple of old parks later in the day, where I know of a few specific areas in those parks that I suspect there are still some deep coins. But, I haven't made it to those spots yet. I'll be doing it, soon...

Steve

JCR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> XP's appears to be a se
> lective Gain control.

Chris -- you may be right, but...while I am NOT an electonics engineer by any stretch...I'm having a hard time figuring out how you could reduce "gain" ONLY on specific types of return signal (i.e. ONLY that which is resulting from salt)...

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that I can't "figure it out," though...as that complexity is far outside my skill set!

Steve

I am not an electronics major either. I would say it is the use of Multifrequency that makes it possible, That and clever signal processing. Interesting innovations in detectors for sure.
I'm also impressed with the seeming major improvements in dealing with EMI. Can't hardly wait to see what else is coming from NM and Dimitar is working on the next version of MDT.

Chris

Chris -- makes sense. I hadn't considered that clever signal processing -- given the multifrequency platform -- may offer some options for creative salt mitigation. Interesting thoughts...

I am also intrigued a bit by reports of good EMI handling with this new machine. I had no intentions of a new machine purchase until the new "Equinox/CTX" replacement is eventually ready, but this D2 is really intriguing...

Yes, the innovations occurring right now are really pushing the envelope, given that we are still stuck in the "coil on a stick" paradigm that NASA-Tom alluded to...at least for now.

Steve

I think the MDT has tech beyond just salt balance. Hes not the first to do it. Tendall of Nautilus designed the AquaSound for a treasure hunter by the name of McDonald here in Fl. You salt balanced and GB in the water. I tell you..... SB definitely should be incorporated into beach machines. At various depths things change .... and im no just talking about dive depths. From surf to neck you can find yourself adjusting your Salt Balance. Some has to do with salt and the other has to do with the type of sand you have out there. If its fluffy sand or gray based hard pan..... you can tell the difference and you need the ability to adjust both the GB and SB. But ..... to answer your question, id say if Dimitar has a patent.... pay the man his dues.

dewcon4414 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think the MDT has tech beyond just salt balance.
> Hes not the first to do it. Tendall of Nautilus d
> esigned the AquaSound for a treasure hunter by the
> name of McDonald here in Fl. You salt balanced an
> d GB in the water. I tell you..... SB definitely
> should be incorporated into beach machines. At va
> rious depths things change .... and im no just tal
> king about dive depths. From surf to neck you can
> find yourself adjusting your Salt Balance. Some h
> as to do with salt and the other has to do with th
> e type of sand you have out there. If its fluffy
> sand or gray based hard pan..... you can tell the
> difference and you need the ability to adjust both
> the GB and SB. But ..... to answer your question
> , id say if Dimitar has a patent.... pay the man h
> is dues.

There’s a few of those AquaSounds around, I still have mine, and it did pretty good in it’s day if you had it balanced correctly, but the Tarsacci far exceeds the technology and depth in the AquaSound.

And THAT'S a piece of data that I was waiting/wanting to acquire. Thanks Gary!

Absolutely agree..... i had 2 of um bought from the guy who was doing the coils for Rudy. HOT HOT HOT ..... IF there was no black sand. My problem with those machines is my ears would ring for hours after using them...... you hit a bobby pin and you dang near pulls those phones off. They were like $3000 new..... $400 to change a battery and $500 for a coil which was like a huge disk. But you have to be amazed for its time it was outstanding for Florida use and i believe it was 24 dcv. The MDT has NO problem doing what the Aquasound couldnt down here. But you are right.... in the right spot they really ran smooth and got very good depth..... id say 14" of a gold ring. I know several guys that still have um..... i sold one my hunting buddy and Cliff has one as well. they were a pretty hot item before Rudy passed.