Best graph I have seen illustrating masking (XP DEUS REACTIVITY)

Etsija82 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Keith Southern Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Thanks for the video Tom....
> >
> > I see he was on reactivity 3...thats getting/is
> > fast...
> >
> > When the machine is recovering that fast it
> starts
> > to blip the target's...in a real irony site
> that
> > would be a tough yet learned diggable signal
> > since larger than nail reading will behave
> > similar..(I would like to hear a 4)....I wonder
> if
> > the i.d. is keeping up at that speed?
>
> The id number for the Dime without the nails are
> 91-92. When you put the dime between the nails,
> the id number for the dime will drop significally
> for the most part and you may think that it is
> some type of trash, but you really should dig
> these type of signals if it sounds good,
> especially if it is a older site or park , as
> there may be silver or something good hiding
> between all the iron nails.

Thanks for mentioning that. Do you know (some examples) how much the VID will drop?

I know the Deus is on another level than the E-Trac, but it is nice that the E-Trac has two sets of numbers and it's the Fe number that is mostly affected by iron and iron mineralization. (Related, Dave Johnson said they are working on another way of presenting VID or the like info.) I wonder if in a future update if the Deus can integrate some of that "horseshoe" iron information into another number outside of the normal Co number. But, then again, perhaps the horseshoe icon that greys out, is enough...

earthmansurfer Wrote:
> Thanks for mentioning that. Do you know (some
> examples) how much the VID will drop?
>
> I know the Deus is on another level than the
> E-Trac, but it is nice that the E-Trac has two
> sets of numbers and it's the Fe number that is
> mostly affected by iron and iron mineralization.
> (Related, Dave Johnson said they are working on
> another way of presenting VID or the like info.) I
> wonder if in a future update if the Deus can
> integrate some of that "horseshoe" iron
> information into another number outside of the
> normal Co number. But, then again, perhaps the
> horseshoe icon that greys out, is enough...

For the most part the id was above 50 and highers number was around 88 depending at what angle you sweeped the coil, i personally would dig this kind of signal.

Keith Southern Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks for the video Tom....
>
> I see he was on reactivity 3...thats getting/is
> fast...
>
> When the machine is recovering that fast it starts
> to blip the target's...in a real irony site that
> would be a tough yet learned diggable signal
> since larger than nail reading will behave
> similar..(I would like to hear a 4)....I wonder if
> the i.d. is keeping up at that speed?
>
> -----The ultra fast response is also available on
> theV3i...I have gotten it so fast the target
> sounds like a needle tapping glass----
>
> I believe with a small elliptical DD coil and the
> 3 setting you would probably be at the fastest
> shutdown between target's while still being
> intelligable that we the user could put to
> use...
>
> This is all armchair speculation .
>
> Keith

Now that Ive gotten my first 40 hrs on the Deus, and taken some time to do some sig comps ITR it has come to light that reactivity 3 on the Deus is very similar to the speed of the G2....stock coil vs stock coil. Reactivity 4 is still (IMO) very usable with a slower sweep speed(1 full swing per 2-3 sec), and pulls away (although not considerably) from the G2. Running reactivity 4 in the heavy blanket of iron, you SOMETIMES need throw the VDI out, and "listen". . Good targets will bleed out, occasionally the VDI will still be reading iron.. Reactivity 4 will still keep up with ID, but that "depends" on the amount/location of adjacent targets.. I have found pitch mode (at least for my ears) to be the best at this task. Pitch mode is very smooth in the iron, multi-tones make me stop and listen to more falses. A G2 outfitted w/ a 5x10 coil comes extremely close to reactivity 4 (in the real world), but depth(clearer "dig me" signals) tips slightly back towards the Deus. I havent had much time using reactivity 5, but you definately need to slow down and listen more....
Please keep in mind.....these are my findings in the soils and environments the "Ive" hunted in... your results may vary. Im not a dealer, and I couldn't care less what any of you do or dont buy... HH

Wont opening up disc also affect how fast a machine might respond. I know nulls kill the Exp. Also, can the Deus be ran as slow as an Etrac/Exp? Would it affect the filtering if you ran it to slow?

Dew

Would like to see the patent for the XP Deus. Haven't found it - wonder if the designers simply didn't bother?

To increase target separation by turning a knob probably adjusts several band-pass filters so that the faster response of a coin remains after filtering the slower-wider response of the iron. This would also weaken the response to the coin and decrease its detectable depth - which is apparently the downside. It would also truncate the higher freq response from the coin somewhat - giving it a shorter sound. It would also make sense to slow the swing down to improve target separation, especially if more signal processing is occurring.

Using band pass filters to remove low freq signal components is nothing new, so it may not be the right answer. The Deus makes much of their patented stem design - but what of their processing method? I'm sure all major detector manufacturers have already scoped this baby out and will incorporate whatever works well into their next design plan.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2012 01:07AM by Johnnyanglo.

I would think 'scope-ing out' would be easy, as there is hardly any hardware, it's all done inside a DSP microcontroller, much as it is in F75's etc etc.The beauty of DSP is you can easily change things like filters, even making them automatically adjusting. I would expect First Texas engineers have a pretty good idea how XP achieve the 'reactivity' control, and they could have included it in their products, but decided to just chose a sensible 'mid-value', and optimised the rest of the design to suit.
I think it would have been nice if machines like the F75/T2 had a 'lower-reactivity' setting, for those times when a more relaxed hunt was wanted. It would be easy to add, either holding in a button at power-up, or, in the case of the F75, having it instead of the largely-redundant PF mode.

I think the Cache mode on the LTD's is a sort of reactivity setting...it slows thing's way down..

Keith

Correct. The boost process modes take more 'snap-shots' ......... hence a increased delay while in boost mode(s). The 'bp' mode is a light delay..... whilst the 'cl' mode is a medium delay.

Johnnyanglo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Would like to see the patent for the XP Deus.
> Haven't found it - wonder if the designers simply
> didn't bother?
>
> To increase target separation by turning a knob
> probably adjusts several band-pass filters so that
> the faster response of a coin remains after
> filtering the slower-wider response of the iron.
> This would also weaken the response to the coin
> and decrease its detectable depth - which is
> apparently the downside. It would also truncate
> the higher freq response from the coin somewhat -
> giving it a shorter sound. It would also make
> sense to slow the swing down to improve target
> separation, especially if more signal processing
> is occurring.
>
> Using band pass filters to remove low freq signal
> components is nothing new, so it may not be the
> right answer. The Deus makes much of their
> patented stem design - but what of their
> processing method? I'm sure all major detector
> manufacturers have already scoped this baby out
> and will incorporate whatever works well into
> their next design plan.


of that you can be sure! this baby has been "gutted" already
probably got scoped the first week they arrived from across the pond!

(h.h!)
j.t.

"I would expect First Texas engineers have a pretty good idea how XP achieve the 'reactivity' control, and they could have included it in their products, but decided to just chose a sensible 'mid-value', and optimised the rest of the design to suit. "

Maybe its the other way around...and it was Deus who scoped out First Texas.

Perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly in my earlier post, where I said 'scope-ing out' the F75 would be easy. I meant that only the basic front-end circuitry is done in hardware - amplifiers and sychronous detectors. These will be broadly the same as any other detector. Everything clever/complicated is done inside the micro-controller chip. Everything. To reverse engineer this means reading out the code from the chip ( could be done, could be easy, could be very difficult) and then disassembling the huge amount of code to work out what it does. This is intensely laborious, and highly skilled work, and is not commercially viable.

The same goes for the Deus. While the hardware will be more complex, due to the wireless links, the 'clever stuff' that makes it perform the way it does is inside a micro. You can download a software update for the Deus, I've no idea if this is 'scrambled' or not, but it shows that XP are not paranoid about the contents of their code.
The Deus is an evolution of the GMP, I think that predates the Tek T2, so I'm not sure either manufacturer are 'copying' each other, rather just independently coming up with their own similar solutions.
I recall Carl Moreland (from Whites) saying they hadn't reverse-engineered the multifreq Minelabs, as most of the clever stuff was in micro code, and it wasn't worth doing.

*** I recall Carl Moreland (from Whites) saying they hadn't reverse-engineered the multifreq Minelabs, as most of the clever stuff was in micro code, and it wasn't worth doing. ***


I think this is correct. To understand the micro code they have to reverse engineer the firmware - which is just too difficult in most cases, binary machine program code. Who wants to try and decompile code for which there is no known decompiler.

On the other hand, any company can look at the specification of the detector and its performance. Then ask, "What can we do to equal or exceed its ability?" The engineers know the limits of the physics involved - there isn't anything new under the sun. The company and board of directors just need to invest in R&D to make it happen.

And, of course, in the case of Minelabs' FBS, it's patented anyway, so finding out exactly 'how they do it' doesn't help you, as you can't 'copy' it.

Pimento Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And, of course, in the case of Minelabs' FBS, it's
> patented anyway, so finding out exactly 'how they
> do it' doesn't help you, as you can't 'copy' it.

Is it really as they didn't Patent everything as to not give up everything in thier apps.

Also, what about the lawsuit Fisher lost to them (I believe).