Findmall.com
 
 






Minelab EQUINOX Forum


Welcome! Log In Register
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: tometusns
Date: October 31, 2017 04:44PM
Quote
Jason in Enid
Quote
tometusns
When it comes to frequencies in a detector, to cover all target types, how the frequencies are combined AND processed is now more important, with the latest detectors, than how many frequencies, for achieving even better results.

Yeah I chuckled at that line. Still not going to say how many direct driving freqs it uses![/quote

I got excited about it. They have researched fewer different frequencies together to achieve even better results!! Which ones are they. I don't know and I guess it doesn't really matter to me. I let them do the research and development. I just appreciate the info they have given us and look forward to swinging one for myself.


Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: "Carolina"
Date: October 31, 2017 06:28PM
stephenscool: The answer is ALMOST as good as FBS and BBS



MINELAB CTX 3030
MINELAB Excalibur II
MINELAB Excalibur 1000
MINELAB Excalibur Gold Sword
VALLON VMH3CS
WHITES Dual Field

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: October 31, 2017 09:24PM
Quote
"Carolina"
stephenscool: The answer is ALMOST as good as FBS and BBS

Nope. I don't think so. After reading this latest release, I'm even MORE convinced that this is going to be a BIG DEAL (Multi-IQ), and all the talk that it won't be "as good as" a CTX is largely marketing, in the hope that some folks remain willing to shell out big bucks for the CTX.

Now, I am no electronics engineer, so I may be off a bit here, but...the way I read the new technology is this (simplified to being hopefully easily understandable):

To ID a target, in the most basic sense, you compare a transmitted waveform (from the coil) to a received waveform (from the target). The received waveform is MUCH MUCH weaker than the transmitted one, AND has been "altered" by the target (and the ground). The "comparison" between the two waveforms (the transmitted one, and the "altered" received one) is done in the processing/software, where soil effects are "dealt with," as best as possible, and then a target ID is calculated, as best as possible.

As I understand it, the reason that using multiple frequencies allows better target ID, is this...because you are transmitting multiple DIFFERENT waveforms (i.e. the different frequencies), each of which then is received back from the target, you get to compare MULTIPLE received waveforms to MULTIPLE transmitted waveforms in order to deduce target ID (and eliminate ground effects). And these comparisons between the MULTIPLE frequencies allows you arrive at a more accurate ID, as compared to using only ONE transmit and ONE receive waveform. So, that explains, for instance, why it is largely true that FBS IDs deep targets more accurately than single-frequency VLF technology.

NOW, here's what I glean to be the "cool part," the "technological breakthrough" that is Multi-IQ. In other words, what makes Multi-IQ a "new technology," versus prior multi-frequency technology such as FBS and BBS. The properties of the transmit waveform were apparently always "assumed," as based on the DRIVE VOLTAGE generated at the control box. To use fake numbers...if a particular machine uses, say, "one volt" as the amount of current sent to the coil in order to generate a transmit waveform, one can "assume" a certain waveform whose properties are based on that one volt of current.

Now, when the machine receives the very weak waveform generated by the target, one can compare it to that "assumed" transmit waveform (again, the one that was based on the one volt of transmit power), and thus calculate target ID.

BUT -- it seems the engineers who created Multi-IQ are exploiting the following idea:

Since the ACTUAL transmit voltage reaching the coil is apparently SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT than the transmit voltage GENERATED at the control box (due to slight voltage loss, through the coil wire, between the box and coil, I guess), then the properties of the ACTUAL waveform transmitted are slightly different than the properties of the ASSUMED transmit waveform.

If only .99 volts reaches the coil, for instance, instead of the 1 volt that was generated at the control box, then the transmit waveform generated by the .99 volts is SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, than the waveform ASSUMED to have been transmitted (again, based on the 1 volt coming from the control box). And since all the calculations of target ID are based on comparing transmit waveform to receive waveform, even slight differences in ACTUAL transmit waveform from the ASSUMED transmit waveform, would have implications for target ID accuracy!

SO -- by measuring the ACTUAL voltage arriving AT THE COIL (which is apparently the "magic" of Multi-IQ), and then using that ACTUAL resulting transmit waveform in your calculations/comparisons (as opposed to the ASSUMED transmit waveform), it would seem logical that you could get a substantial improvement in target ID accuracy that way. As I read this latest release from Minelab, this is what I deduce is going on, and if so, this would suggest to me that the Equinox will offer not only a potential great improvement in ID accuracy as compared to single-frequency units, BUT ALSO an improvement in target ID accuracy as compared to existing MULTI-frequency units, including FBS...

Hmm....

VERY intriguing. Can't WAIT to see "real world" feedback to see just how much of an improvement this "Multi-IQ" technology proves to be...

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: IDXMonster
Date: October 31, 2017 10:24PM
Steve-I can assume you have owned and operated the CTX for a good period of time? I don't see it in your equipment list but I thought that you had one before?
I will take the completely other side of the road and predict that while this new Equinox will be EXCELLENT for finding MANY DIFFERENT types of targets,the FBS/FBS2 will still reign supreme at finding AND IDENTIFYING HIGHLY CONDUCTIVE TARGETS CORRECTLY/CORRECTLY ENOUGH in order to tell the operator to dig a hole.
Of course,the only way to know what it will really do is for many FBS users to take the Equinox to their sites that are "dead" and see if they wake up again. If they start producing good targets once again and it happens in VOLUME and IMMEDIATELY,then it's clear that the new tech has trumped about everything out there.
Regardless,the other nice side effect of this new machine is it's supposed speed and light weight,which will undoubtedly bring former Minelab users back to the brand because they couldn't swing a heavier machine anymore for whatever reason. Newbies to the brand will be in also at the projected price point with all it has to offer. It'll be a formidable setup,to be sure. I would expect no less!

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: BigTony
Date: October 31, 2017 10:32PM
IDXmonster, we might already have this new device and don't even know it.
There is a learn function on the Exp II and it is terrific, it will make your hunted out sites give up more targets but no one talks about it.



BigTony

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: October 31, 2017 10:46PM
IDXMonster,

No, never owned a CTX. Explorer SE Pros are what I have always swung.

You may be right about the Equinox. It's ID capability -- i.e. it's ability to tell a user "dig me," on deep targets -- may NOT exceed the CTX's ability. I have a feeling we are all going to be surprised -- in a good way, but whatever the case, you are exactly right, we will have an answer after the machines have been in users' hands long enough for us to develop some expertise with the machines. There is going to be a ton of "hype" at first, probably good AND bad. I will largely disregard much of that. But after some time passes, once users begin to learn the machines, and some of the nuances therein, we are going to start hearing some "ground truth" that will give us the answer, one way or another.

Either way, I'm prepared. I am prepared on one hand for the Equinox to be so much better than my SE Pros that they become relegated to "backup status;" on the other hand, I'm prepared for the Equinox to be a good-performing "backup machine" to my SE Pros, to be used when I need a faster unit to hunt in thick trash, or when I need a waterproof unit to hunt in the rain, stuff like that. I am cautiously optimistic, but prepared for either case. The one thing I think we can probably bank on, is, it WON'T be "garbage..."

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: Jackpine Savage
Date: November 01, 2017 02:55AM
Quote
Ksdirt
I wonder if a barber dime is a large silver:confused:

Ah, there's the rub.
will the 5 kHz single freq out perform the X-T 705 at 3 kHz? An updated modern version of the 5kHz Musketeer Advantage, one of the deepest seeking silver finders ever made and pretty decent in bad soil. Advantage with WOT coil = DEEP big silver.

Dimes the rub.

Tom



Save the Concentrics


Minelab Advantage, G2, Omega 8500, X-Terra 705, F75 DST and a Fisher ID Edge



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2017 02:58AM by Jackpine Savage.

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: "Carolina"
Date: November 01, 2017 03:51AM
Steve: His question was how well does it run on wet saltwater sand with lots of iron and detectors nearby? Minelabs answer was ALMOST as good as FBS and BBS detectors. Not my answer but theirs. Marketing? I don't think so. I think it means exactly what it says.



MINELAB CTX 3030
MINELAB Excalibur II
MINELAB Excalibur 1000
MINELAB Excalibur Gold Sword
VALLON VMH3CS
WHITES Dual Field

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: Jason in Enid
Date: November 01, 2017 07:00AM
Quote
IDXMonster

Of course,the only way to know what it will really do is for many FBS users to take the Equinox to their sites that are "dead" and see if they wake up again. If they start producing good targets once again and it happens in VOLUME and IMMEDIATELY,then it's clear that the new tech has trumped about everything out there.

I have to disagree a bit here. I am currently re-working an old "dead" site and its producing like crazy! several years ago, and friend an I pounded this site every week for months. We pulled dozens of silver, over 100 wheats and a handful of indian head cents. We worked it over and over until it stopped producing. I went back the next year a few times but it never would produce enough to justify the drive out.

Fast forward a couple years to a couple weeks ago. I hunted it again just because I had to be there for business. 4 silver dimes, 8 wheats, 2 tokens, V and buff nickels and a big gold ring. Last weekend I went back and pulled another 5 dimes, sterling earings, and more wheats.

This is hunting with my CTX, the same CTX I used on it a few years ago. I have no idea why its suddenly producing again but I'm not complaining! LOL . Now, if I had waited until I had the 800 to go re-try that old honey hole, I would have sworn it was just the machine finding everything that the CTX couldnt.

The real test will be to take to an old producing site and hunt it back to back with other detectors while flagging targets before digging. What can one hit that that the other cant? Hunt old deep sites, old fields, trashy parks, put both detector through their paces and compare them, but the only true comparison is real targets still in the dirt

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: IDXMonster
Date: November 01, 2017 07:18AM
Quote
Jason in Enid
Quote
IDXMonster

Of course,the only way to know what it will really do is for many FBS users to take the Equinox to their sites that are "dead" and see if they wake up again. If they start producing good targets once again and it happens in VOLUME and IMMEDIATELY,then it's clear that the new tech has trumped about everything out there.

I have to disagree a bit here. I am currently re-working an old "dead" site and its producing like crazy! several years ago, and friend an I pounded this site every week for months. We pulled dozens of silver, over 100 wheats and a handful of indian head cents. We worked it over and over until it stopped producing. I went back the next year a few times but it never would produce enough to justify the drive out.

Fast forward a couple years to a couple weeks ago. I hunted it again just because I had to be there for business. 4 silver dimes, 8 wheats, 2 tokens, V and buff nickels and a big gold ring. Last weekend I went back and pulled another 5 dimes, sterling earings, and more wheats.

This is hunting with my CTX, the same CTX I used on it a few years ago. I have no idea why its suddenly producing again but I'm not complaining! LOL . Now, if I had waited until I had the 800 to go re-try that old honey hole, I would have sworn it was just the machine finding everything that the CTX couldnt.

The real test will be to take to an old producing site and hunt it back to back with other detectors while flagging targets before digging. What can one hit that that the other cant? Hunt old deep sites, old fields, trashy parks, put both detector through their paces and compare them, but the only true comparison is real targets still in the dirt

I just read that about where you and I think it was Evan? had done that and the place was like new...yes,that might be a red herring and is an unusual situation. But if that happened with the Equinox at ALL your sites,then there's something to take note of! I'm wary of the "target flagging" thing because unless they are flagged in a way that the second machine doesn't know exactly where the target is,I.e with the Findpoints feature which no other machine has...then the second machine has a clear advantage of knowing where to look in the first place. Getting the initial hit is where it all starts...so the comparisons would have to be more carefully set up in that regard.
OK where is this damn Equinox so we can start playing with it??:lol:

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: Charles (Upstate NY)
Date: November 01, 2017 08:45AM
Quote
Jason in Enid
Quote
IDXMonster

Of course,the only way to know what it will really do is for many FBS users to take the Equinox to their sites that are "dead" and see if they wake up again. If they start producing good targets once again and it happens in VOLUME and IMMEDIATELY,then it's clear that the new tech has trumped about everything out there.

I have to disagree a bit here. I am currently re-working an old "dead" site and its producing like crazy! several years ago, and friend an I pounded this site every week for months. We pulled dozens of silver, over 100 wheats and a handful of indian head cents. We worked it over and over until it stopped producing. I went back the next year a few times but it never would produce enough to justify the drive out.

Fast forward a couple years to a couple weeks ago. I hunted it again just because I had to be there for business. 4 silver dimes, 8 wheats, 2 tokens, V and buff nickels and a big gold ring. Last weekend I went back and pulled another 5 dimes, sterling earings, and more wheats.

This is hunting with my CTX, the same CTX I used on it a few years ago. I have no idea why its suddenly producing again but I'm not complaining! LOL . Now, if I had waited until I had the 800 to go re-try that old honey hole, I would have sworn it was just the machine finding everything that the CTX couldnt.

The real test will be to take to an old producing site and hunt it back to back with other detectors while flagging targets before digging. What can one hit that that the other cant? Hunt old deep sites, old fields, trashy parks, put both detector through their paces and compare them, but the only true comparison is real targets still in the dirt

Does your soil freeze in the winter? If so the soil heaves, expands, this slowly flips coins end over end and move stuff around. Its not unusual to come back to a hunted out site and find lots more coins after those that were on edge flip over flat and are detectable. After a few seasons of this they do eventually play out.

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: TomNH
Date: November 01, 2017 11:38AM
Quote
Jason in Enid
Quote
IDXMonster
The real test will be to take to an old producing site and hunt it back to back with other detectors while flagging targets before digging. What can one hit that that the other cant? Hunt old deep sites, old fields, trashy parks, put both detector through their paces and compare them, but the only true comparison is real targets still in the dirt

Exactly........
This is not done enuf in the typical UTube testing. And dig everything, one ways, jumpers, no VIDs etc.
Especially pulling good stuff from iron infested cellar holes & ball parks. That is my Safaris weakness I need to overcome.

c u later
Tom
LFOD !


avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: Jason in Enid
Date: November 01, 2017 12:04PM
Quote
IDXMonster

I just read that about where you and I think it was Evan? had done that and the place was like new...yes,that might be a red herring and is an unusual situation. But if that happened with the Equinox at ALL your sites,then there's something to take note of! I'm wary of the "target flagging" thing because unless they are flagged in a way that the second machine doesn't know exactly where the target is,I.e with the Findpoints feature which no other machine has...then the second machine has a clear advantage of knowing where to look in the first place. Getting the initial hit is where it all starts...so the comparisons would have to be more carefully set up in that regard.
OK where is this damn Equinox so we can start playing with it??:lol:

Yeah, I was hunting with Evan there in the past. I can see your point about flagging "known" objects, but not 100% agree. Most targets aren't full, round, clear signals. Often they are just squeaks that you need to stop and investigate. You don't have to be directly centered over it to get that first peep. When hunting with friends using different detectors, we often like to compare targets before digging. Some times, even knowing exactly where a target is can't make the other detector see it.

Hopefully the EQ does come out in early December while the ground is still thawed. A mid winter release will be showing a lot of air tests and beaches LOL

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 01:08PM
Carolina --

Good point, in that stephenscool WAS specifically asking about how the Equinox will work on wet salt sand. I didn't go back and read his post, only saw yours where you responded.

And it wasn't particularly "aimed" at you, either. Even though I responded to "you," there have been lots of posts on lots of forums (some of my own, included), trying to figure out where the Equinox might "fall" in terms of performance -- compared both to OTHER brand units, and to Minelab's own machines themselves. Obviously, it's speculation at this point, but my post was more general, just a "brain dump" of my most recent, general thoughts (for what it's worth), regarding how well the Equinox is going to perform overall.

When I said "just marketing," I was more talking about Minelab's implication that the Equinox "won't be as sensitive to deep silver" as FBS. That's what I think may be more "marketing" than what the truth might prove to be. Again, just speculating...

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2017 01:28PM by sgoss66.

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 01:20PM
Quote
Jason in Enid
Quote
IDXMonster

I just read that about where you and I think it was Evan? had done that and the place was like new...yes,that might be a red herring and is an unusual situation. But if that happened with the Equinox at ALL your sites,then there's something to take note of! I'm wary of the "target flagging" thing because unless they are flagged in a way that the second machine doesn't know exactly where the target is,I.e with the Findpoints feature which no other machine has...then the second machine has a clear advantage of knowing where to look in the first place. Getting the initial hit is where it all starts...so the comparisons would have to be more carefully set up in that regard.
OK where is this damn Equinox so we can start playing with it??:lol:

Yeah, I was hunting with Evan there in the past. I can see your point about flagging "known" objects, but not 100% agree. Most targets aren't full, round, clear signals. Often they are just squeaks that you need to stop and investigate. You don't have to be directly centered over it to get that first peep. When hunting with friends using different detectors, we often like to compare targets before digging. Some times, even knowing exactly where a target is can't make the other detector see it.

Hopefully the EQ does come out in early December while the ground is still thawed. A mid winter release will be showing a lot of air tests and beaches LOL

I agree with you both -- IDX and Jason. IDX -- YES, when you "flag" a target, and then call over your buddy to listen to it, just because your buddy's machine can "see" the target doesn't necessarily mean it would have been as adept as yours at finding the target in the first place, before either of you knew it was there. I had this issue before I hunted FBS. My buddy with an E-Trac would find a suspected good target, and then call me over to listen with my machine. Though I could always "see" the same targets, HE was always the one finding them initially. I was not. ID at depth was a big part of the reason for that, I finally came to understand...but point being, I understand what you are saying in that it is much easier to "work" a machine over the top of a known target and get a signal, than it is to "find" in the first place.

But Jason talking about "comparing signals" on targets is -- I agree with him -- a very good way of comparing detectors/coils. Fast forward seven years from what I just talked about above -- my buddy hunting with an E-Trac and me with a non-FBS machine...I hunted with that same buddy last week -- he with his E-Trac and 11" Pro coil, me with an E-Trac and 13" Ultimate coil. We "compared targets," as usual, and there were definite differences noted between the two machines, running the same settings. His, with 11" Pro coil, hit harder on a deep rifle bullet, mine gave more of a "dig me" signal on a deep Merc that I dug. Meanwhile, they were fairly similar on several other targets.

There is definitely a lot to be learned from comparing two machines (or coils) over the top of an in-ground, undug target. Likewise, there is something to be learned regarding how well a machine initially locates targets from within areas that have been heavily hunted before.

Good points, gents.

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2017 01:24PM by sgoss66.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login