For gold rings, what machine...

I'd like to pick the brains of some long-time hunters...

I am intending to learn to audibly differentiate, AS BEST AS IS POSSIBLE, gold jewelry from all the other similar-reading trash targets in the ground. I know many old-timers will say that certain machines simply had more "clues" in the audio than others, which would allow them some (however slight) advantage when trying to dig rings from amongst the trash. I generally hunt parks, and have dug probably two dozen silver rings in the past year; I KNOW I have swung my coil over several gold ones as well, but simply have not dug them. Lately, I've been learning to dig low tones, and have really been paying attention to the audio, trying to learn to dig nickels from amongst the similar-reading trash (with SOME success). But obviously, an Explorer is NOT the best machine for THIS job. I realize that there are plenty of machines out there that excel at PICKING UP small gold, including my Gold Bug Pro. HOWEVER, I'm more interested in hearing opinions NOT on which machine DETECTS gold at the best depths or in the smallest sizes, but instead, which machine offers the best TONAL ability to discern a gold ring from other low-tone targets.

Put another way, please give me your vote for a still-available machine that, with proper experience and time on the unit, gives you the BEST ability to AUDIBLY hear whatever nuances suggest that a target may be gold, as opposed to foil/beaver tail/can slaw/square tab/ring tab?

Thanks all,

Steve

Hands down Tesoro units especially the older Tesoro notch units have audio variances not found in these new bells and whistles super meter units.

Have to admit looking for gold rings in parks with lots of junk can be tedious and certainly takes practice and a trained ear due to experimenting but a gold ring just weighs many more times than the junk that mimics them and audio variances can be found in the pinpoint mode.. VCO equipped units do a better job honing in on deep coins but lack the variances and gosh knows I have done a lot of experimenting...

Units that come to mind in the Tesoro line are the Toltec 100, Pantera,Golden Sabre Plus and Golden Sabre 11.....Golden U-max their newest just had too many tones and notches which ran into each other but understand Tesoro now has changed that with the new versions of this units and will modify the old ones for a set fee..

Having said the above imagine gold nuggett units will do a good job also but never used one.

Unfortunately in wet salt sand these Tesoro's will chatter but are doable on the dry salt sand...

That's an easy one. Sovereign hands down. Of all the machines I've owned, including Tesoros, the Sovereign gives much more target information via it's audio. Not just because of it's numerous tone alerts, but because of the long drawn out analog like language it uses to tell you about targets. It's a digital machine, thus the numerous tone alerts, but the audio is long and rich like on some of the best analog machines that were known for good audio information. We scanned in over 100 gold rings to record their VDI on a graph and most of them gave a smooth, "round", warm, soft, qaulity type of tone. A lot of junk will sound harsh, tinny, hollow, bangy, scratchy, warbly, and so on. I have read that some guys swore they could hear a different "quality" to a gold ring versus a tab with the same or similar VDI #. I've read that here and there in the past but don't have any opinion on that one way or the other, but I guess it's possible.

The VDI is also key. With a 180 scale, and foil starting at around 60, going all the way up to 180 where everything above a copper penny reads 180, I am not aware of any other machine on the market which such a wide high resolution span in the "gold range" from foil to copper penny. This makes it handy to split hairs on targets. It's rather easy to note say 4 or 5 pesky pull tab numbers (they range from 148 to 169) at a site and avoid them, while digging all other close by numbers in the hopes of a gold ring. Nickles are around 144 to 146, although some old ones can read down to about 136 if they are degraded bad enough by the soil over time, but most read around 144. So it's rather easy to dig nickles and avoid most trash and easily tabs of course since they are above nickles. That's nice for those days you are only old coin hunting but still want to dig any old nickles, and might even come up with a gold ring in the nickle range.

Beyond the Sovereign, I know of a local guy with an MXT that swears he can hear the difference between a pulltab and a gold ring with the same VDI #. He only land hunts for rings and does well.

Now, in terms of small fine gold like fine chains or tiny gold earings, the Minelabs (any of them) are not the best for that. But the way I look at it most of what is lost are gold rings, and when it comes to those, even super thin and fine gold rings, nothing will get them as deep as a Minelab for the most part. The reason being that even a thin gold ring is a complete loop, so it presents a rather strong target to the detector. Other machines may be more sensitive to fine tiny gold items, but I'll put my money on a Minelab when it comes to depth on any gold ring.

I can tell you that of all the Minelabs, I've owned 3 Explorers, and the GT seems to hit harder and deeper on gold rings for me. I've read numerous others say this about the FBS machines compared to their Xcal or Sovereign. Why? Not sure, but I think it's perhaps the more robust long drawn out audio of the BBS units that at least makes you notice them better. Either way, the Etrac and Explorer are still excellent machines like the GT for getting rings, like coins, at some outstanding depths in even the worst of soils or beaches.

I have heard and read good things about the Tesoro Golden micro max being a very viable gold ring park hunter. With it's tones and notch features, there can be way to tonally separate certain gold rings from trash, as well as notch them in versus notching out the trash.

With a smaller coil, it could be one of the best gold ring sniffers for trashy park areas.

Should be an interesting thread so lets join the dance and give your opinions or perhaps a trick or two doesn't hurt either...

i wouldnt want to trust any one model over and above any other model on gold alloys ,toomuch overlap on other targets to be certain.i know from gold finds they can be just about anywhere on the dial

Thanks for the info, everyone. Good stuff to think about. diggers -- I agree on the overlap of targets, and gold being anywhere on the dial. My point is, if I have a pull tab that digitally reads "x," and a gold ring that ALSO reads the SAME "x" value, I am wondering which machines might offer clues THROUGH THE AUDIO that THIS "x" VDI number may be more likely to be a gold ring than THAT "x" VDI number. There is no sense, in my mind, park hunting and hoping that VDI numbers will tell you what you need to know regarding gold vs. pull tab or foil (well, except maybe a unit with a TON of resolution in the gold range, like the Soveriegn apparently has, as I was unaware that such a machine even existed until all the information that critterhunter provided). Anyway, my point is that I KNOW some old, savvy veteran hunters would, with certain units, INSIST that there was a slightly, subtly different sound that gold rings would make, versus trash. Sometimes, I can tell a SILVER ring, from a silver coin or clad coin, using my Explorer, so I know such subtle audio clues are possible. I simply wonder which machines may be best at it...and I am getting some ideas from this thread, so far. I expected someone would mention "Tesoro," as I have heard that before; sure enough, Dan brought up a few Tesoro units. I've also heard votes for the Sovereign, and the MXT...any other votes (agreeing OR disagreeing with some units already mentioned) -- especially low-cost units?

Steve

Not a low-cost unit, but...v3i in single frequency(22.5) - not normalized will expand the scale on the lower end and allows for much greater resolution...and a slower recovery delay will improve tonal quality(longer/smoother). By expanding the scale on the lower end(low conductors) more vdi numbers in smaller increments allows for a better degree of accuracy within that range...good luck finding something that works for ya!!!

Steve....sure expected....more dancers and less wallflowers on this one...it certainly takes patience to hunt gold rings in trashy parks but have to believe some are just(nobody can tell gold rings from tabs and foil guys) and some well aren't willing to share.....
Indeed no one can tell gold rings from the junk that mimics it all the time but you can sure cut down the odds and keys, sinkers, large balls of foil which weigh more closer to the gold ring can fool anyone.
You ask a metered unit that reads the same gold ring vs. tab etc. well heavy as heck but the Toltec 100 may be the best ID unit Tesoro ever made and in pinpoint will hold the tone longer for a gold ring versus the junk that imitates it just try a tab and a medium gold ring that read the same on one and a light may go on.
Of course swimming areas water and beach increase the chances and trashy parks are another aspect and thats why your local park has gold rings guys walk over time and again.

Interesting insights, Dan. Very interesting...your observations on this thread, and dancers and wallflowers...

I'll have to do some reading on a Toltec 100...never heard of one...

I appreciate your input and insights -- and you sharing your experience with respect to my original question.

Thanks!

Steve

I haven't had a lot of success with gold rings, but on my CZ-5 my favourite tone are mid tones. When I get a foil reading I scan the target 4 times. If it locks on foil it's foil 99% of the time. If it jumps to another mid tone or high tone I always dig and 95% of the time
it's something other than foil. might still be junk but not foil. Like wise any jumpy mid or high tone is a dig. I got a small woman's silver ring a couple of weeks ago (crushed) that jumped between zinc and the dollar.
On the CZ5 , a locked on ring pull is always a ring pull, the locked on pull tab is always Canadian clad if it pinpoints big and tab if it pints small. locked on nickel is always pull tab, l/o zinc is american penny, Canadian dime(clad) or a soccer spike. the high tone dollar is
modern penny 99% or if deep hopefully one of those rare silver coins.
The CZ also has some subtleties to the audio that will stop me and make me dig.

Happy hunting

CZ-3D with the separate/unique/special 'foil' tone

or

Older Minelab Sovereign XS with NO meter........... and with older pie-pan 8" "coinsearch" coil.

I thought I had the gold ring sound figured out on the AT Pro but I didn't. The two gold rings I've found with it this year (a 10K class ring and a 14K ladies ring) sounded like a round tab and foil respectively. I just happened to be digging all the mid tones due to the fact that the area is very old.

The two gold rings I found with the V3i last year both sounded like square tabs. No special sound and no special analysis graphs. They looked and sounded like tabs.

I have found a plated gold ring with the CZ-3D that Id's as a nickel with a high tone.

So the secret to finding gold it seems, is to have the physical and mental stamina to dig every solid, repeatable signal, and heck, even a few iffy ones!

Of course, machines like the Gold Bug that are made especially for the task might give an advantage.

Pinpoint twice, dig once



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/08/2012 01:49PM by pulltabMiner.

The Sovereign has a notch on it which can be handy in certain situations. For instance, we recorded the VDI of well over 100 gold rings. These rings were all found by an Excal water hunting over the years, digging every signal above iron, and not just good signals, so the test pool wasn't biased by somebody concentrating on certain VDI ranges or only good sounding targets. Anyway, we then scanned in a large random sample of pull tabs from various sites that were found with no digging criteria, so once again this was an unbiased test pool of both old round and new square tabs. What we found, for one thing, was that certain myths among the detecting crowd are not true. I'm sure you've heard to "dig the nickle zone" for gold rings. That's simply not true. We didn't find any more greater concentration of gold rings in that range, but rather they are pretty evenly spread out across the entire conductivity range. If anything there were probably more rings that read well into the lower foil range than in the nickle range. The only other variance we found that was from about zinc penny on up to the silver coin range the number of gold rings dropped off significantly, due to usually a gold ring having to be very large or containing a good deal of copper mixed with the gold to read that high.

Now, anyway...The range of tabs was from about 148 to 169 on the meter. If found through testing that the Sovereign GT's notch window was about 12.5 digits wide, so that by raising it high enough to just bearly kill a 165 tab number we would block 84% of all known pull tabs at a site, and still recover the vast majority of gold rings to be found there (statistical data wise after crunching the numbers). While you obviously would not want to use a notch at say the beach where the general rule is dig it all because it's rather easy to quickly scoop up a pull tab and move on, there are certain situations where using the notch to kill tabs could be a very deadly strategy in order to cut down the trash to ring ratio. For instance, at a park where there are just thousands upon thousands of tabs, and those are by far the most common target at most parks. By proper use of the notch you could easily kill off 84% of those tabs, and thus raise the ring to trash ratio much more in your favor, and as said still recover the vast majority (well over 70 or 80% if I remember right, if not more) of gold rings to be found there.

If anybody wants to read that report let me know and I'll post the data and graphs we compiled using the Sovereign.

As far as conductivity ranges go, by first glance the Etrac for instance looks rather deadly in terms of it's two-dimensional scale of ferrous/non-ferrous scaling. However, the ferrous number can range widely and is largely unreliable. For that reason most Etrac guys don't pay attention to the ferrous scale. Besides, most targets have been compressed into the 12th line on it for that aspect of ID. Lacking that as a guide, you are now forced to follow the conductivty range of targets to split hairs on targets. Copper pennies start at around 38 on the scale, and the VDI conductivity range is from 1 to 50 on it. Thus, you are now roughly left with a conductivity number scale of 1 to 38 for where most gold rings are going to fall, versus roughly from 60 to 180 on the Sovereign for that same basic range. As a result, trying to split hairs on things like pulltabs can be more problomatic. I may sound like I'm picking on the Etrac here but that is not my intent. I'm talking about any machine with a low conductivity scale resolution. So, with a less wide scale of resolution, by blocking out one or two particular tabs you are in effect blocking out a much wider range of potential targets, where as on the Sovereign you can mentally note 2, 3, or even 4 or 5 tab ID numbers, and still not be blocking out as broad of a spectrum of nearby targets, and so can dig targets that are only different by one digit in the hopes of a gold ring, while avoiding specific tabs that are numerous at that location. I find, oddly enough, that identical tabs made by the same company, even bent or missing their beaver tail, usually will read the same exact VDI number as a flat, uncrushed tab by the same company, that even still has it's tail intact. Not always the case, of course, but largely....Or at least they'll still read somewhere well within that 148 to 169 tab range, if not the exact # of the same tab that is flat and intact.

On the subject of no machine being able to tell the difference between a tab and a ring. I would differ a bit on that opinion. For instance, on my QXT Pro using a 6" coil I could hear the double chirp of the two holes in a square tab if it was laying flat and shallow enough. Also, as said, there is a certain "quality" to gold ring sounds that can be very telling. If not for the ability to tell them from trash with the same VDI # (atlhough some swear this is possible on certain machines), then at least by knowing what a gold ring should NOT probably sound like. Much trash, especially oddly shaped trash, will sound bangy, harsh, sick, warbly, tinny, hollow, and so on...While gold rings "should" (most, not all) sound warm, smooth, round, soft, solid, and so on. By that very nature alone, you can at least concentrate on what most gold rings should sound like, while avoiding a lot of trash that obviously doesn't.

Also, I should add that in sampling that test pool of rings, besides 95% of them having a "quality" sound to them, the vast majority also locked onto one or two VDI #s no matter which way you swept over them. Only a handful of odd rings with spiderweb like webbing or numerous pattern holes over their body would vairy by 3 digits or more depending on which way you swept. These rings also had a rather "sick" sound to them. Of course these requires the ring to be laying flat to present a good surface area for the machine to look at. If it's on edge I'm sure that many of the good rings out there could possibly be jumpy in VDi and have a bad audio quality to them.

Sorry, one more thing about the myth of most or at least a higher percentage of rings being said to read in the nickle range. On many machines, the "nickle" range in VDI is much broader than that of a machine like the Sovereign, and so includes targets say well down into the foil range or well up into the tab range, and so it's a wider "net" or "zone" that then many machines will ID a gold ring as "nickle" in. That reason, I feel, is why the original myth and saying about gold rings reading in the nickle range (many of them) got started. That being said, even if I'm only old coin hunting I still love to dig those nickle targets, as I too still feel a certain "probability" that it could indeed be a gold ring. And, because it's almost a sure bet that a 144 to 146 target with a stabile Id and good "round" audio is going to be a nickle, because as said tabs generaly start at about 148 and go up from there, there is a certain satisfaction of at least knowing I should at least stand up with a nickle in my hand, even if it's not an old nickle, and as said there's just that chance that it could be a gold ring.

just did a test on a variety of gold rings in different alloys & thicknesses of the band and Ids on the Deus show them from 40 - 91 ,in air .

critterhunter -- that's a TON of info there, with some very interesting thoughts in it. I need to re-read it and think it through...some good points you made on the high-resolution of the ID scale...I do notice that many tabs and such -- even on the Explorer, tend to fall at a certain set of IDs...only problem is, my wedding band rings almost identical to one particular "old style" type of square tab -- one of the ones with only one hole, not two -- the "back" side of the tab is solid, instead of having a hole in it. In any case, on a "higher resolution" unit such as you describe, maybe I could get "tight" enough ID ranges for the main styles of tabs so as to disc. them out -- and then listen for the "good-sounding" low- and mid-tones. So much to think about...I may have more thoughts or questions after I digest further, but I'm impressed by all that "calculating" and "probability" stuff you did regarding the tabs, and where rings fall on the scale...

NASA-Tom -- on the old Sovereign XS you mentioned, that one is meterless, so I'd be going by sound only -- never had a "meterless" machine before. Sounds a bit intimidating...

On a side note -- is it "beyond the state of the science" or the capability of VLF detectors at this point to somehow get some read on density? I would THINK eddy current induction in a dense, thick object like a gold ring would be DIFFERENT than that in a thin "square tab" or "beaver tail" that might otherwise register the same, ID-wise. No? There's no way to "exploit" that density difference, even in an "audio nuance?"

Steve

Wow that is quite a broad range you have there. Sound like a dig everything kine of Scenario vs the Sovergien report from Critter that sounds like most more limited range. If I am wrong please correct me please.

Bryanna

diggers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> just did a test on a variety of gold rings in
> different alloys & thicknesses of the band and Ids
> on the Deus show them from 40 - 91 ,in air .

Steve rather than beat a dead horse to death lets close the subject as your talking to a brick wall judging by the participation of one of the most learned forums on the hobby.

You call them audio nuances...I call them audio variances and some of the best detectorists I know will flat out tell you a tab sounds just like a gold ring.

Well heres what you do buy, beg, borrow and older Tesoro with regular pinpoint...forget VCO as it won't help you.

Find a tab and a gold ring that registers the same number on a metered detector.

Press the pinpoint and go back and forth over the tab and then go over the gold ring the same way...you will find the the gold ring just holds the tone longer than the tab.

Heck I am using 25 buck Calrads and unfortunately 74 year old ears and to me there is a difference...if a light goes on and you hear a difference use it to your advantage...if not
perhaps the old guy has lost it or perhaps has a God given gift in any case I enjoyed the dance.

Steve,
Very interesting question. I'm sitting here recalling some of the audio responses I've dug that turned out to be gold. They all had one thing in common. They were small, solid signals. Ring or chain, they were all the same;small and solid. But I have also dug a lot of trash that were also small, solid signals, too.

I used to search after the same type of machine you are searching after. I don't any more. I now just want to be able to focus a audio flag onto the conductive range I'm focused on so that when I hear that audio flag I know to stop and dig it. I no longer even guess if it is going to be gold or trash. I just recover it until the gold is shining in my hand. Any detector that will let you focus on a particular conductive range will work for that type of hunting.

Good luck!
HH
Mike

Mike --

Small and solid, makes sense. You say you "used to" search after a machine with audio clues, but "don't anymore." Do I judge that to mean that you couldn't find what you were looking for?

Dan --

You mention a "God-given gift;" I have a theory on that. Totally unsubstantiated, but a theory...and that theory is that a person who has has been "gifted with" either a realized, or at least an inherent, inclination toward music would be the same type of person who would excel at being able to hear audio nuance in a detector's tones. I learned to play music by ear at a young age, and I while I have never pursued being a talented musician, I can certainly hear things, musically, that either sound "right" or not, in terms of pitch and such. My wife, on the other hand, has no ear at all -- and would tell you so. I'm guessing that handing me a detector, and asking me to listen for "audio nuance," and handing it to her and asking the same of her, would NOT give you equal results. So -- Dan, I would very much believe it if someone told me that, to them, there is zero difference between a ring and a pull tab; I also believe it possible that for someone else, they can hear nuances (or variations, as you call it) with different targets that might give them an edge...

Anyway, just an unsubstantiated idea that I have thought about, regarding this topic...now all I need to do is figure out which machine might have the "richest language," so to speak, down in the gold range -- even if that language happens to be "incomprehensible," or even "non-existent" to some...

Steve

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CZ-3D with the separate/unique/special 'foil'
> tone
>
> or
>
> Older Minelab Sovereign XS with NO
> meter........... and with older pie-pan 8"
> "coinsearch" coil.


@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Does that go for the CZ-70 as well Tom (as it has the 4th tone ID system)?

steveg

great point on the musical connection. I have often thought that was significant.
Maybe instead of concentrating on the detector, we should be considering the headphones that are being used, as that is our only connection to the sound.
It would be interesting to have a headphone were you could adjust the base and treble.

Great thread

The CZ-70 has a 4th tone (special tone) for the square-tab range. And this is the OLD style square-tabs............ which are much better conductors than the new square-tabs/flip-tabs of modern-day. And since most gold jewelry ID's as 'foil' .............. no......... the CZ-70 (of the CZ series) would not be the choice for jewelry hunting.

I know I mentioned this here (on this forum), years ago, but is well worth mentioning ..... especially now. ------
Say you have a mans wedding band that ID's as 'round pull-tab'
You also have a aluminum round pull-tab that also ID's as 'round pull-tab'
One item is "medium conductivity" and "high density"
The other item is "medium conductivity" and "low density"

Right now........... with current technology............... metal detectors can only measure phase-shift angle differential (change) ................ and both items will conductively ID as the same phase-shift. The large differential between the two targets actual density ....... are unable to be 'measured' at this (current technology) time.

(((Ultrasound can 'start' to perform this))).

Heres my take on CZ's they do like gold especially in the foil range but with a VCO pinpoint experimented and can't tell any difference between gold rings and the junk that mimics but will always dig a foil-nickle bouncing hit and gold rings seem to hit a little harder.

My wife always gripes I talk about hearing a 12 inch dime but can't hear her across the supper table, but husbands have been known to tune out the better half....

I think the problem is with junky parks is the amount of hits in the gold ring range are usually high and checking them all takes a lot of patience and can become mind boggling and imagine we all have our little ways depending on our unit to cut down the odds whether it be meter placement, audio or just a gut feeling.

Not all units have audio variances, we don't all have the same headphones or for that matter the same hearing which has to be added to the situation.

My advice for newbies or oldbies on the next rainy or snowy day take some time to compare gold rings and the junk that mimics them and perhaps a light will go on and you will have perfected your detecting skills at least with that particuliar unit which should then become your junky parks units and old or new as long as it works for you.

I actually started the hobby before the informative computer days and learned by trial and error and was turned onto the old Tesoro unit trick by a gentleman that has written many field reports for various detecting magazines and hope it helps someone along the way as it certainly got me a gold ring or two from trashy parks and may also do the same for you.

Perhaps some day an inventive individual will come out with a detector to cut down the odds gold rings versus junk but until that day those that experiment learn the little extras to make him a better detectorist.

Steve,

No...I could not find a detector that could reliable id gold from trash by tone. So I changed my critera to detectors that could give me an unique audio alert for a specific conductive range(s), which I refer to as "gold trash".

I got out a little bit yesterday morning. Went to one of my jewerlry patches but could tell right off someone else had hunted it the day before so left it and went to another. In this place I used the Tesoro Golden uMax. Got a rattily gold tone and up came a peice of thin aluminum foil. A little later I got another, identical sounding rattily gold tone. It turned out to be a deeper nickel. The tone started rattily and then got better and more solid as I got closer to the nickel. Point I'm am making here is that for every bad tone you hear for a trash target you will hear for a good target, and for every good tone you get on a good target you will also hear for a trash target.

In my opinion, it is better to be able to read your sites and identify what "gold trash" to focus on that has the greatest potential to put a gold item into you hand.

Wisdom from an inland jewelry hunter.
HH
Mike

Interesting thoughts, Mike.

You obviously have a real "method to your madness" when it comes to jewelry hunting...sounds like you have some "go-to" spots that you hit periodically...

And, the whole idea of which "gold trash" to focus on is interesting. You really have this down to a science, it sounds like. Right now, it seems that my best hope is to dig everything that sounds decent, and hits real close to "nickel," and a bit lower -- knowing that I'll be missing some gold, but at least digging a "range" that contains some good stuff (nickels, and some rings...) I wouldn't know how to determine which "gold trash" to dig, in a "site-specific" way...

I'll be interested to hear your thoughts on the GB Pro once you have used it in this application...

Steve

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CZ-3D with the separate/unique/special 'foil'
> tone
>
> or
>
> Older Minelab Sovereign XS with NO
> meter........... and with older pie-pan 8"
> "coinsearch" coil.


Tom, may I ask what is the reasoning behind your picks?
An F-75 in 4H not going to do it well?

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CZ-3D with the separate/unique/special 'foil'
> tone
>
> or
>
> Older Minelab Sovereign XS with NO
> meter........... and with older pie-pan 8"
> "coinsearch" coil.

Tom does that unique foil sound sound differant than the normal foil sound? I've noticed some mid tones sound differant on pulltabs, etc. I havn't correlated too much of a differance, I've dug both sounds and it's almost always junk on both.

Info appreciated.