Choose fontsize:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
News
jamiepearce
January 17, 2024, 07:59:51 PM
 Evening.been out the picture for a few years.is there any weekenders coming up this year?
rookypair
January 04, 2024, 09:57:08 AM
 I think everyone has dispersed in all directions. Good to see some of the original peeps posting to 
rjm
January 03, 2024, 11:26:38 PM
 This site is pretty dead now! 
TOMTOM
January 03, 2024, 05:38:50 PM
 HI IM HERE ANY RALLYS
dances with badgers
December 28, 2023, 09:40:42 AM
 the dreaded social media lol
DEADLOCK
December 27, 2023, 08:26:38 AM
 Still going social media plays a big part 
dances with badgers
December 26, 2023, 10:41:07 PM
 This site used to be amazing, where has everybody gone? 

View All

 

Currently there is 1 User in the Chatroom!





Click here if you
need van signs


Or here if you
need magnetic signs


Or here if you
need a
Corporate Video Production Company in Milton Keynes

See our
privacy policy here


Pages: 1 2 [3]
  Print  
Author Topic: Des Dunne pushing e.trac in treasure mag !  (Read 12079 times)
Jeb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


from the N Wales Mountains


« Reply #30 on: January 11, 2010, 07:52:58 AM »

Geoff says that the "E Trac" is "probably the best commercial detector out there a far as depth and sensitivity are concerned ."

Sorry Geoff ,but i could very easily take issue with that statement.
The reasons being I bought the E trac on a certain High flying Minelab users recommendation  at the time who is well known on all the forums as a respected detectorist.

I had previously at one time in the past,been a Explorer user, & always having one amongst my detectors.Not using them much eventually though ,because of continuing shoulder and elbow problems occurring the last few years (frozen shoulder & Tennis elbow)
I bought The E Trac, on the recommendation it was a lot "lighter" than the previous Explorers were.
On buying it i discovered the weight "Loss" was marginal. Yes, weight had been reduced by the Pro coil  but not to the extent that it now felt much lighter to use.
 I found the Menu system a bit better to scroll through and navigating the menu had gone for the better.
 But to say it was deeper or more sensitive is i`d say "debatable". Very debatable.
 You see , people say Its deeper ! but what i`d like to know , it , what are they basing their "Facts" on ?
 Are they basing it on head to head comparison with another person next to them with an SE or a Explorer 2 ,comparing signals as they are found ?
Or, are they simply as most do ,and being "suggestive" in so much that they "think" its deeper & more sensitive from their past recollections of what they achieved with their past SE or Explorer 2 ?
 If that`s the case, then all i can say is "recollections" can be often Jaded and slightly inaccurate on details.

Any new detector bought I`d say,has a psychological persuasion effect on the mind.
It says ,"this IS going to be deeper, and more sensitive," because it has to convince  you that you`ve spent X number amount of pounds wisely and you need to convince yourself that you`ve done the right thing. After all you`ve bought the biggest and best !!! So you`ve been told by the media.
 Hence the mind is telling you " yes, your getting better depths "

In reality though , its not quite the case. Your more than likely getting the same, but slight enhancements on occasions. This when recognised, immediately smothers over any other "similar" findings, and immediately goes to the for front of your mind saying "See! it IS deeper and better than my previous detector".

I DID get shut of my E trac because of mainly, the weight issue.
But in the time i had it ,i used the recommended settings given by the guys in the "know" and i can honestly say, It didn`t impress me enough to WANT to keep it, and put any medical problems to one side .
I have used the Minelab Explorers over a good length of time and i can put my hand on my heart and tell any one, that i found less with the Explorer than i have with my F75 . When i started using the Goldmaxx even i found more with that, than i ever did with the Explorers.
The Explorers work on the Multi frequency application. They start off sending out 28 frequency's, which in turn diminish down to around 5 which then end up with actually one or two as the final BEST FREQUENCY that the processor sees as right for that ground.
The processor will not always get it absolutely right though.
 Lets do a scenario that says when searching, the Explorer or E trac send out their 28 freq`s and end up on a particular piece of land beneath you on 3kHZ and 10 kHz as the processors chosen best Data for that ground .
Yes you will get the deeper bigger target by courtesy of the 3kHz freq. BUT!! you also might miss the Tiny Edward the first farthing that is sitting there ,because the Processor didn`t see fit to send "on that occasion" ,the 18 kHz freq out beneath you needed to get that tiny coin .
Hence YOU MISS the farthing.

 Now ! along you come the next day with your F75 or your Goldmaxx Power with your higher freq,and you`ll go over that same ground and GET the Edward the first Farthing. You then think . "How the hell did i miss that yesterday with my bestest biggest  Minelab " ?
 The answers simple. The Processor didn`t get it right on the instant you were there yesterday.

It really is a case of getting it right in your head what should you be using on the day. And thats another discussion. Grin
All i can say is since i no longer use the big Minelabs, I detect with a more confident air about me ,that i DO find more with my F75 than i ever did with the big Minelabs and thats certified by the finds not thoughts. And unfortunately for the Minelab Explorer and E trac owners ,that is a fact .

" i must also add ,that this is just my thoughts on this discussion and others might find different, so its all down to what you interpret in your findings that you can comment on . it doesn`t nessesarily mean its absolute ".
« Last Edit: January 11, 2010, 08:38:39 AM by Jeb » Logged

Heaven won`t take me, and Hells afraid I`ll take over.
............................................................................
Chef Geoff
Archaeological and Hardware Advisor
Dark Lord
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9368



WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 11, 2010, 10:58:21 AM »

Brilliant post Jed and I am in agreement with 99% of what you say, but even If the Explorers reduce their effective signals to 2 wavelengths then you are covering more basis. I do think that FBS technology has gone as far as it is going to go and with improvements in signal processing on single frequency machines it will be left behind. In the majority of cases detectors are not technically detecting at any greater depth than they were 30 years ago but the returning signal processing has improved making the weaker signals workable.
To use an analogy related to photography, If you buy a top quality zoom lens for £1000 and set it at 135mm now go and buy a medium to top quality 135mm lens, the fixed lens will always be better quality, so as with FBS it's a case of "a jack of all trades, master of none".
I have 2 Etracs primarily for the 60-61 Research group as no other machine can give the target id we need (we are looking for iron), but I personally prefer using the SE and I couldn't really tell you why.
I do find the blinkered "minelab is god" mentality of some users (and you know the ones I'm talking about) to be off putting. One thing I have found but got shot down for even suggesting is that the EXP/Etrac's have different responces at different sweep speeds dependant on the target and that your very sweep speed may be influencing what frequency's the machine decides to use. Thus you are in effect using an Xterra but changing the frequency by the coil speed. Unfortunately "dark age mentality" rules and therefore Slow and low works so it is the only way.

The truth is we are very quickly reaching maximum depth with VLF technology as the laws of Physics denote it's limits, the Etrac, V3, Deus and the F75 ltd/T2ltd are using current technology and adding bells and whistles.
Had research gone in to the PI system rather than the easier to manipulate VLF in the 1970's then we could be detecting at  only dreamed of depths.
At the end of it all, as many already know it is about feeling comfortable with the machine you are using both physically and mentally and enjoying using it.
Logged
Jeb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


from the N Wales Mountains


« Reply #32 on: January 11, 2010, 01:37:16 PM »

Thanx Geoff and i would also agree with your post.
Isn`t it great when straight talking is discussed and not brand ideology or Loyalty is put first before the true facts.
And yes! i do know who your referring to. I read your posts on the Minelab forum and i know what your referring to.
Logged

Heaven won`t take me, and Hells afraid I`ll take over.
............................................................................
Tinman (paul/Lisa)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 408


« Reply #33 on: January 11, 2010, 01:53:39 PM »

well you learn something new everyday never looked at it like that (frequencies). dont take this the wrong way im asking because i dont know but when you say it could be in not the best frequency so miss a small farthing yet pick up something beneath it thats bigger, couldnt it work the other way also? im just asking thats all as the more you know the better you should be (in theory anyway lol)
Logged
Chef Geoff
Archaeological and Hardware Advisor
Dark Lord
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9368



WWW
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2010, 02:21:39 PM »

Yes Paul it can work both ways. I have over simplified the facts a bit but the swing speed is a factor along with mineralisation, emi and moisture content, the slow and low approach allows time for the Exp/Etrac to (hopefully) run through its bank of frequencies and give you a reading, plus if you are using quick mask it allows time for the iron recovery.
unfortunately the slower swing speed favours the lower frequencies and so deeper but also larger targets, these machines have now become almost legendary for not being able to find small pieces of gold ie a chain or back of an ear stud. but these can register in the right circumstances purely by increasing the sweep speed, unfortunately this means you would have to cover the same ground 2 or 3 times to utilise all the frequencies.

As Jed has said they only truly work on a few wavelengths this can shown by the fact that they have terrible "in air tests" the machines rely on what they call the "ground matrix", this is the machine basically measuring the ground to decide which frequencies to use, take it away from the ground and it becomes confused.
Logged
outlaw
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 714

Chairman Brecon MDC ( since 2013 )


« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2010, 02:40:05 PM »

I would like to hear from Kev casa dos whether he agrees with you on this, what sort of swing speed was he doing when he found his gold coin ?

What frequencies detect the small gold chain for example ?

Its  an interesting topic, i know for a fact my se does not respond the same over freshly ploughed or turned soil, though i still found a roman brooch on freshly rolled soil, though the tone was different from what i would have expected.

and more importantly, I wonder if Des Dunne would agree with these opinions !

As an edit ; i am having difficulty in getting my head round this, as we are constantly being told to sweep low and slow, it has been proved many a time very small targets such as minums etc, you will miss them if you swing to fast, got me thinking now Geoff  Grin
« Last Edit: January 11, 2010, 02:53:05 PM by outlaw » Logged
Tinman (paul/Lisa)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 408


« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2010, 03:05:19 PM »


Very interesting guys  I can see what you mean and I genuinely mean that, Would explain quite a bit acctually.


Logged
rjm
Superhero Member
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 2488


XP Deus


« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2010, 03:08:33 PM »

Some excellent posts by Goeff and Jeb of which I agree with.

Quite an interesting subject.

I'm not an electronics expert but am always reading anything to do with metal detecting as I find it a fascinating subject. Any literature from or by Minelab gives (to me anyway) the impression that 28 frequenies are sent out and processed.
This is true. 28 Frequencies are sent out but only the strongest ones are used. In effect the weakest are "processed out" so that Minelabs claim cannot be disputed.

However, to my mind the statement by Minelab is misleading as it gives you the impression that all 28 frequencies are sent out and processed simultaneously.

As discussed by Geoff/Jeb (and other published articles) we know that this is not the case.

As I understand it, the Whites Spectra V3 is the only machine on the market that simultaneoulsy sends out 3 frequencies and simultaneously processes 3 frequencies. Hence it has excellent ability to work near iron and pull up different metals/sizes at different depths.

Another interesting point is that at a typical rally possibly at least 50% of the machines are the Minelab Multi-frequency machines. This in turn means that it is statistically likey that most finds will be made with these machines compared to other brands. Other brand users see that it is the Minelabs that have pulled most of the good finds and it is possible they have their minds turned that their machine isn't as good.

I'm not saying the Minelabs are bad machines. I've already said that possibly they are the proven best all rounders but, as Geoff said, I don't think they are the master of all situations.

I think it's accepted they don't like disturbed soil and tend to struggle near iron.

I just wish Minelab were more open and honest with their advertising and artices. It's not even public knowledge what processors are in the Explorers, E Trac or Safari as they won't divulge. Other brands will give this information, so what are Minelab hiding? I suspect it may be the same processor in all their machines just driven by different software. I don't know.

As Geoff said, I think it's getting to the limits with present technology as to the depths we can get with discrimination and that pulse or ground radar is the way forward.

Minelab FBS may be on it's last legs unless they can add significant processing power to actually 'properly process' all returned signals.



Logged

Chef Geoff
Archaeological and Hardware Advisor
Dark Lord
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9368



WWW
« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2010, 04:13:53 PM »

I would like to hear from Kev casa dos whether he agrees with you on this, what sort of swing speed was he doing when he found his gold coin ?

What frequencies detect the small gold chain for example ?

Its  an interesting topic, i know for a fact my se does not respond the same over freshly ploughed or turned soil, though i still found a roman brooch on freshly rolled soil, though the tone was different from what i would have expected.

and more importantly, I wonder if Des Dunne would agree with these opinions !

As an edit ; i am having difficulty in getting my head round this, as we are constantly being told to sweep low and slow, it has been proved many a time very small targets such as minums etc, you will miss them if you swing to fast, got me thinking now Geoff  Grin
As I have said I have somewhat over simplified the whole thing, When I said larger or smaller I am referring to the target signal not the physical size of the find, minims are still quite big in signal terms, Cut halfs being small. You would have to ask Kev what depth it was at as well, also Kevs coin was quite large so is not the best test. I am not saying they are blind at the wrong speed, just that they can focus better on different targets at different speeds.
I'm not sure Des has done that much testing on Sweep speeds, but I shall email him to see if he has a view. Unfortunately I asked him face to face if the etrac sent and received 27 signals simultaneously and, well the guy is wasted he should be a politician. and after 10 minute explaining, managed to not answer the question. But in his defence he does work for minelab so I wouldn't expect him to say anything that wasn't the company line.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2010, 04:21:30 PM by Chef (Geoff) » Logged
outlaw
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 714

Chairman Brecon MDC ( since 2013 )


« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2010, 04:34:17 PM »

Yeah ! sometimes its hard to stay on focus when he was explaining things. He knows minelab detectors though !

I think at the end of the day, when most targets are within the top 8", most detectors will find the goodies, just that some might give a couple more inches, and only the end user can decide whether he or she shells out £1000 plus for these extra inches.

The debate as to which detector is best will run along time, because of all the
variations and different levels of expertise that are encountered on the field.

 My friends who both have explorer xs, are still finding the goodies, gold included, they re using one of the first explorers. I sometimes think those earlier detectors were the best  Grin, and all later models are revamped versions !
« Last Edit: January 12, 2010, 05:41:42 PM by outlaw » Logged
Chef Geoff
Archaeological and Hardware Advisor
Dark Lord
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9368



WWW
« Reply #40 on: January 12, 2010, 03:50:34 PM »

Well I got a reply from Des, so here you go for what it's worth.

Hey Geoff,

Happy New Year!

Yeah, during prototyping phase we monitored that aspect of operation not only with the stock coil but with other coils as well (as available at the time)
Right now I can't put my finger on that research (archived)
However, I can tell you that I'm working on a few additional articles and plan to include a section on sweep speed etc.
I also covered that aspect of operation on X-Terra.
From memory, I can say that ET likes all sweep speeds but combined with ground filters, patterns etc it would have to be examined closely.

Regards

Des Dunne
Logged
rjm
Superhero Member
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 2488


XP Deus


« Reply #41 on: January 12, 2010, 08:58:20 PM »

.........I think that's a waffled "I don't know" Grin
Logged

outlaw
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 714

Chairman Brecon MDC ( since 2013 )


« Reply #42 on: January 12, 2010, 10:55:53 PM »

edited by me, felt my sense of humour might not be shared !

Though tis a strange response from a field application specialist  Roll Eyes

 Grin
« Last Edit: January 12, 2010, 11:18:38 PM by outlaw » Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Home
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal