Tom what detectors do you like best and why?

No new units (yet). A couple on the horizon.....and with some 'promise'. Will advise.

I have the gold bug pro on order[since may?] I had the opertunity to purchase a new used ltd,I am hoping the gbpro will be as good if not better than the ltd on the beach.[fresh water] I have found silver,but no gold yet............Any new info on the gold bug pro,Tom??

F4
F75LTD
I can dig it!!!!

I only know that they have been released...... but have no first-hand knowledge of performance.

Just curious Tom, your list has aged over a year, any updates?

Yes........ one change. I'll (now) update the GPX-4500 to a GPX-5000.

My Teknetics G2 has been repaired....... and is enroute back to me...... for another round of definitive testing. So far...... the 71-Khz Gold Bug-2 is still the worlds best micro-jewelry unit. The G2 (might) add a good twist (niche).......and have a place.......... but not replace the Gold Bug-2.

Lately......... I have been having stupendous performance/success with the F75 LTD in boost-process...... with the tiny 5" coil. . . . . but only in certain areas/environments/conditions. It is a 'average performer' in "general" hunting applications............. yet.... in it's niche..... it is unsurpassed....... opening doors that have previously ...... never in the history of metal detection...... have ever been able to be opened before. It requires such a lengthy explanation...... that I (currently) do not have the time to report. When/if I do.... I'll add it to the thread "Rcpt Ack of F75 LTD Prototype".

OK Tom, as my Spanish homies at work would say... (oh my goodness)...........You just got to deliver now buddy. get yourself an Espresso and lets do this. Talk to us man

Just out of curiosity - Tom, have you ever tried any of the C.Scope detectors?

A few years ago.... I had a C-Scope in my test-garden. One major problem........ my test-garden was officially invalidated. It had been 9 years since I had last validated the test-garden..... and ALL targets were (had sunk) 2" deeper. (((My test-garden has a sink-rate of 1" every 4-1/2 years))).

Tom

Would you please update this list of your favorite detectors for 2012?

R/
Jim

Hmmmmm. One and-a-half year old post........... and nothing has added/subtracted from this (my) list.

That's about the response I was expecting.....

Ok Tom. I know this is a very old thread, but any updates to your original list of best detectors and their best uses now? It is a great thread and worth reading again...Stuart

Stuart............ I was wondering 'when' (not 'if') this thread would re-surface. Just because it is old.......... does NOT constitute 'irrelevant' !!!

I will now Update/Exchange/Replace:

The Minelab Exp/E-Trac.......... for the CTX-3030
The Minelab 4500................... for the GPX-5000

and add a new entry (not previously listed):
XP GMP (for carpets of nails application)

I will also insert the F75 LTD/SE in boost-process w/5" coil (for carpets of nails....and depth..... application).

All else remains the same.

Interesting to see how 'little' has changed........................... yet........................... what 'little' that has changed.................... has opened up doors that have never (in our previous detecting history) .................... been opened up before.

I was sorta expecting the Nokta CORS unit with small coil to make list.

Almost. And it still may. I have not tested one yet; but......... heavily rely upon feedback/input from forum members.......... then............ if deemed 'probable' (vs the lower grade of; 'possible') ............ I'll test it........ validate/verify............ possibly endorse.

The f75se still in there, and it's how old?

Aaron

Hello Tom. I have 2 questions.

1. Which machine has in your opinion the best audio (I mean the widest range of audio information and details available - about size, depth of a target, maybe even material)?

2. Imagine there is no VDI display (on any machine) - you have to depend on audio alone. What would be your choise for an area with loads of trash (like pull tabs, screw caps, bottle caps, foil), moderate level of iron and some unknown valuable items (from the whole range) between. You could choose from all detectors (even with VDI if you want, but you are not allowed to use this "feature" ). More "limitations": you are only allowed to dig 10 holes, but you don't have unlimited time to choose the best signal out of 100. In this area depth would not be an indicator for the quality of an object. Which one would you choose?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2015 11:33AM by x2000.

1. The Minelab Sov XS had exceptionally good audio intelligence. It could audibly present multi-warble reporting on one individual target that had differing conductivities all within that individual/specific target........ such as a stainless watch. The Sov XS was a good detector. Now......... I would say the XP GMP has replaced the XS. If you throw a small nail in the mix.......... the Minelab was prone to simply a full audio 'null'......... and would miss many targets. The XP GMP...... while not a deep detector....... will unmask tremendously better than the Sov XS. . . . . . and also report multiple conductivity tones on a individual target.

2. (Unsuspecting) loaded question. First......... it is rare that I (or we) detect by any form of meter/VDI. Audio presentation is more dependent-demanding than most folks suspect. A VDI reading is a distant 'secondary'. There have been many times/occasions whereby I taped over the meter/ID system (of various brands/types of detectors)........ and it hardly affected my abilities/performance in the real world. ((( There is a direct connect/correlation between your "Question 1" and your "Question 2" ))). Soooooo........ since you said depth is not that important.... but high trash is the condition........... I would (once again) have to say the XP GMP. I (still) very much like the audio of the CZ............ but........... it's audio presentation is tremendous 'artificial audio intelligence'. Not real. Not raw data. All artificially generated. And the CZ is not that good in high trash environments. (((( Hmmmmmmmm...... the XP GMP doesn't have any form of VDI/meter anyway!!! .... and it is one of my top-choice units for trashy areas. ))))
If you were to say 'depth' was also important............ then the equation would change enough to enter a 'boost process' type unit.

The more die-hard of a detectorist you become.......... the less dependent/reliant you will become on any form of meter/VDI.

And still............. as a detecting community............... we still place too much importance on VDI's/color graphs/graphic display's/meters.

Audio speaks volumes.

X2000 = Good substantiated "on-target" questions.

I could not agree with you more on the Sov. Tom! That is the only detector I ever had , that I feel I became "one" with. After using it for 10 years, my focus changed from ghetto parks for old coins to gold rush relics. So the sov has now been replaced for its poor iron abilities,and thus I spend ALOT of time here , trying to further my learning as it relates to hunting in iron trash. Ray

Quote "And still............. as a detecting community............... we still place too much importance on VDI's/color graphs/graphic display's/meters."

Visual displays still have a place, especially in non-ferrous trash but are still lacking in presentation. Starting with a segmented buckets to group phase responses into, then moving to a individual phase response numbered display, many mfg haven't spent a lot of time seeking to improve the visual signal interpretation. These don't tell much about the object, only what it's averaged peak phase response is. Works ok for high conductors in low mineral soil due to the limited non-ferrous trash content that mimics high conductive coins. But the lower conductive regions abound in modern non-ferrous trash of all types. Added minerals skew it all.

Digital beep, digital number = limited information.

What is needed is visual respresentation of the signal characteristics. I should be able to see the signal's response. I've been looking at what visuals have been put in place to date and they really group into a few categories. Segmented like the Fisher CZ series. A Phase number like the Fisher F series. A histograph like the Whites DFX/XLT series, and a Ferrous/Non-Ferrous Matrix like the Minelab Explorer/Etrac series. Or some combination or variant of all 4. The newest thing I've seen is visual presentation of the ferrous/non-ferrous matrix in AKA's hodograph and Whites Polar plot.

But which of these can tell you if a object is round or irregular shaped? Laying flat or tilted? Thin or thick? This is a lot of the inforrmation we can get from analog audio, but is lost in digital audio. Analog audio is gone, though some mfg are still trying to simulate it. It appears White's is the only Mfg really looking into visual presentation of the signal responses. The V3i is tops in this department. I admire AKA's efforts but there is so much more that can be done with current technology without having to re-invent the wheel when it comes to visual presentations of signal. characteristics.


HH
Mike

Thank you very much for the answer Tom. With 2 years of metal detecting practice I'm relatively new to this amazing hobby (compared to other guys of course). My main problem was the wrong strategy I had chosen since the begining. I was "detecting" with Garretts pinpointer alone during the first months, which was an awesome (iron ) expirience. Of course I was fully aware of it, but I had to try this, to see if this hobby was for me.

After that I tried the Deus, bought the Vista Gold and now I have the Deus again (together with Golden Mask, Troy X5 and White's Eagle). I relied too much on the numbers, using my eyes instead of ears. But it had a reason. The sound of Deus headphones was just flat - together with reactivity "2" this machine was not telling me anything.

I changed my approach with another setting. I also got rid of the headphones. Together with reactivity "3" it is slowly starting to make sense. But to make a step forward, I had to avoid looking at the numbers. I'm sure that for you (as for other experienced guys) audio is the most important thing and VDI can be a confirmation or additional information. I can not detect this way, because the VDI part takes over. I'm not self disciplined enough. I cought myself lately changing my mind about the target, just because it sounded "not perfect" and showed "the wrong" number. I saw that number by accident, while switching 2 programs. Now I'm looking away while changing programs (I wish there would be a way to turn the VDI meter completely off - hmm, it would be a good idea for the next software update ).

It also disturbs my concentration, slows me down and destroys the flow (and idea) of metal detecting which is like sport to me (or a kind of fluent movement which has to be very efficient and minimalistic). I think, everything should happen intuitive and natural. It also is more chellenging, which makes it more exciting.

Now that I know what I want, I just need the right tool for it... I will gather more information about the XP GMP (thank you for showing me the right path). One thing, the GMP shaft is not what I would expect from a company like XP: [www.youtube.com]

But if the audio is right...

Thank you,
Cheers
x2000

What a long video. A more definitive test would have been ONE nail........... instead of 40 - 50 nails. Resting a pile of nails on a pile of large coins (conductively shorting them together) seems to be a common test. A real-world (more realistic) test would have been: Do not remove both bricks and place a pile of nails directly on a pile of coins; rather...................... remove only ONE brick........... and place only ONE nail ABOVE the coins...... then replace the one brick. (Effectively sandwiching a nail between two of the bricks...... subsequently having the nail about 2-inches ABOVE the pile of large coins). This would present a more realistic, real-world 3-Dimensional X-Y-and Z axis presentation. And orient the one nail on a 45-Deg angle....... NOT perpendicular and NOT parallel to coil-sweep direction (mitigating 90-Deg E&M phase-angle delta/differential).

The intent of the video is well taken (and makes a point/statement); yet, just needs some minor tweaking.

You are right. I have to admit, I just posted a link to this video, because of "the shaft"...

Unfortunately there are some weird tests on YT. Many people are having an agenda... The majority is tweaking all settings and preparing the scenario until they get the expected result. If something doesn't fit, they simply don't show it (in the best case...).
I would like to see some tests where a guy is walking with different detectors (from the same angle) over one small area (showing everything of course). He should mark all targets he would normally recover, get the other machine later and walk over the same area again (using only one setting for each machine). It would be interesting to see if he would find other targets, the first detector missed, but the most interesting part would show the comparison between signals in undisturbed (!) soil (and the result, after digging unknown (!) objects).
The problem with many tests I have is, people who are sweeping the coil 1000 times until a signal appears. It would be very importatnt to sweep the coil one time only (from left to right, or right to left - it could happen several times, but with a break after 1 sweep). That is in my opinion the most overlooked thing. In real life I'm covering an area with one sweep and move forward, if nothing stops me...

The ideal scenario would be if someone could change the order and detect the second half of the area with the other machine first. This would be the kind of a test I would like to see.

P.s. I think "DirtFishing" did something similar (I can't remember if it was the E-Track together with G2...).

I watched a similar one the other day where a guy hunted a trash lot with 3 machines and marked each signal with a golf tee. If each machine hit the target he put 3 golf tees on it. Now it would have been a good video. Because he had some targets that not all 3 machines hit. But he only showed on video the targets all 3 machines hit. I would have done both. But he was pushin a certain machine. I wondered if the targets it located that the others didn't, if they were iron nails. That machine was notorious for calling nails good targets.

Thanks for taking the time to update your list Tom. Somehow I expected the XP GMP to make your updated list. I may have to buy one before long. It has been on my mind for quite some time. Maybe it is time I considered selling a couple of my machines and adding it to my collection.

Thank you Daniel. This is the kind of videos I have a problem with...

Stuart..... and others. If I can keep folks out of trouble....... and into the best technological advancements (to the best of my abilities).........maximizing the 'fun factor' of life to its highest potential..................

About the Fisher audio... I was watching a clip yesterday and was a little bit surprised when this guy pulled a registration plate out of sand.

[www.youtube.com]

Was only the tip of the coil above the target? Hmm...

VDI vs ADI - I started like many very dependent on VDI. If you look at my detector purchase history you can see how I moved away from VDI all the way to a detector with no VDI. If you have a detector with Good VDI I still feel it is useful but audio still can communicate more info in less time then any graphical display. I do think good VDI with Good ADI is the killer combination. I think that is one reason Minelab has been so popular great Audi and great Visual info.

There is a huge difference in ways detector companies present audio - I think Minelabs audio is very organic and easier to learn the Whites which seems much more digital. I am sure how good or bad your ears are has an impact on which audio communicates the best for you.

Hearing, sight - but still no touch - well I guess the FORs and New Racer will have some element of tactile feedback. It would be nice if you could make the the Iron Grunt an Iron vibe and leave the audio to communicate the quality of the good targets. - listening Nokta. Be the first company to give us Iron feedback via vibration.

Bryanna - Nebraska

Current - New to me but not new MXT Pro and T2 SE2 - Previous Minelab Sovereign GT, Minelab Safari, Whites DFX, Whites Eagle Spectrum
Smile its a good for you!

believe it or not,there are many very experienced older guys that think
the high frequency (t.r) 100 khz had the "best" audio presentation especially at depth,
which unfortunately didn't go much beyond the 6" level,however the analog,smooth audio
on coins was truly wonderful,and can be difficult to replicate today with the advent of digital
instruments. i am referring specifically to (modulated audio)..from what i have been able to determine,
the cz-3d has excellent audio reporting at depth (i don't own one) but have read testimony to this in the forums.

(h.h.!)
j.t.