Analog or Not?

[blue dunbar]

How would I know if my older Conquistador Umax is analog or digital? I believe it's the type of signal given out and not the fact that there's no meter on it. Great gurus of the dirt, please enlighten this humble disciple.

 

[MarkCZ]

I believe the terms,
"Digital"
"Analog"
Are referring to a type of metering system,
an "analog" meter is just a simple scale with a needle pointer! (old school stuff)
a "digital" meter uses a scale of, well digits, number, symbols, or graphics and in this day and time most are LCD displays. The electronics that drive these metering systems has more processing abilities than the old school analog meters (all though in many cases that is debated to rather it better or not)

A detector that is of the beep and dig design are not thought of as either! they are an audio only detecting system. These usually carry a lower price tag than the more computerized analog or digital detectors.

That's my take!
Mark

 

[Monte]

an 'analog' circuitry design, not 'digital' as we know them today. I'm not a detector engineer but I work with them enough to know how the more frustrating digitals can be.

How would I know if my older Conquistador Umax is analog or digital? I believe it's the type of signal given out and not the fact that there's no meter on it. Great gurus of the dirt, please enlighten this humble disciple.

It is not a matter of whether the display is an LCT type or a needle-meter type, but how the detector works and processes signals. I have enjoyed many good 'analog' detectors through the years, especially appreciating how well they can handle densely littered sites with abundant, closely-spaced iron nails.

Some of the best have been my favorite Tesoro models. Their good analog circuitry and well designed quick-response and fast-recovery helped boost my ghost towns and renovation site finds a lot since going to the Inca in '83. I worked many other models form other detector makers and some I also enjoyed for 'cruising' the more open areas. In '94 I was working my White's 5900 Di Pro SL and Tesoro Bandido and Silver Sabre II, all analog types, when I encountered a new-to-me analog with a feature I really wanted.

A fellow had a White's Coinmaster Classic III. What I wanted was kind of what I had, slow-motion Discrimination with quick-response and it was actually a touch better in the dense iron nails than my Silver Sabre II (both had 8" concentric coils). In '95 I went with the Classic III Plus and then I not only had good performance in iron, but the Classic III Plus also adjusted down to a full-range, all metal accept (zero rejection) Disc. level. I latched onto that model and in about August of '96 I switched over to the improved Classic III SL.

Like the Classic III Plus it had the same controls and provided the full acceptance (like Tesoro's referred to as ED-180). Not TID display on the Classic III SL, just excellent analog performance in most hunting environments. Why do I mention the Classic III SL in this reply? Because I wanted to have a TID that worked much like the Classic III SL, mainly for some urban coin hunting.

Well, sometime about

 

[MarkCZ]

I've owned both the Teknetics 8500 and the 9000 (still have an 8500) the 9000 would ID better than the analog counter part! But the analog (metered) version proved more reliable over the long hall! The "LCD" digital displays would go bad on the 9000 and factory stock of replacements didn't last long.
The model number that was used for these two detectors (8500 and 9000) came from a number of equivalent transistors, meaning the Teknetics 9000/B IC circuit design contain and ran on the equivalent of 9000 transistors! (the same for the 8500)
The segment bar graft of the 9000's digital display was an improvement over the analog meter! Place the digital LCD can display for information about the detectors settings vs a basic analog.
They're isn't much driving and analog display! but the digital has more processing going on and more involved drivers.

Mark

 

[Monte]

Look back about '83 or so when the 'original' Teknetics brought out the CoinComputer 8500 and 9000 as their top-two models. Both worked with basically the same analog performance with their 4-filter, fast-sweep circuitry. Was there any real difference in field performance? No, not really. How about appearance? Yes, the 8500 had a needle meter design and the 9000 had the LCD display.

I've owned both the Teknetics 8500 and the 9000 (still have an 8500) the 9000 would ID better than the analog counter part! But the analog (metered) version proved more reliable over the long hall! The "LCD" digital displays would go bad on the 9000 and factory stock of replacements didn't last long.
The model number that was used for these two detectors (8500 and 9000) came from a number of equivalent transistors, meaning the Teknetics 9000/B IC circuit design contain and ran on the equivalent of 9000 transistors! (the same for the 8500)
The segment bar graft of the 9000's digital display was an improvement over the analog meter! Place the digital LCD can display for information about the detectors settings vs a basic analog.
They're isn't much driving and analog display! but the digital has more processing going on and more involved drivers.

Mark

Mark,

Quite true about the LCD failures with those early Teknetics models. A friend and I used them both and we both favored the 8500B over the 9000 and 9000B models. It was a nice introduction into metal detector design, however, and we have sure seen how that change has come our way. Of course, part of the reason is simple supply-and-demand. The LCD displays became cheaper, the needle meters became more expensive or really, unavailable.

We won't get into any technical analog Vs digital electronic discussions here because it would take a good engineer, like Carl Moreland at White's or ?? to offer up the best and most practical answer. But with reference to how some consider all LCD models to be 'digital' in operation and all needle meter models to be 'analog', I used to ask some folks 'Why?' Why do they call an LCD display model 'digital' and most often the answer was something simple like this:

"Well, the 'digital' models show a segment or specific area for target ID but the 'analog' needle models can vary all over the place."

Then I have pointed out that many Target ID models, with a needle-type meter do NOT just 'float' wherever they choose, but fall into or register at a segmented point on the display. If I remember correctly, and I might not, but the Compass Challenger X100 had 16 'segments' on the display where the needle might register. It didn't just 'float' to display a particular reading accurately, but acted like an LCD model with a segmented read-out. The same was true for the Compass Scanner series, the Tesoro Toltec and a number of other needle-meter display models.

So, the thought, by some, that an LCD was 'digital' because it lighted up a 'segment' and a needle-type display was 'analog;' because the needle floats all over just wasn't true.

Actually a really good needle meter display modol was, and still is, one of the best all-purpose TID displays I have ever used, and that was the excellent XL Pro (and the pre-named 6000 Pro XL and former 5900 and 6000 Di Pro SL units).

Just a little food for thought for other readers on this great 'analog' forum

Monte

 

[MarkCZ]

Okay, monte I have no plans on debating the analog vs digital but if can lets continue the discussions of some of the differences and how some people see them differently.

An analog meter on the detectors I've opened up operated via Two Wires! the LCD displays that I've opened up all have multiple contact points and or ribbon cable connections.
Common thoughts about the two differences of the displays are,
A digital alarm displays the time by either LCD or LED, and I would say it would be hard to find a LCD alarm clock because they don't light up but both display the information using a digital display.

Another common item is a analog multimeter for testing and measuring electrical circuits, I still have a nice one of these.
But the newer multimeters are referred to has a digital multimeter. The digital meters are even cheaper one can break down values way better.

Now, a electronic engineer could for sure break and elaborate on the actual workings of the electrical components.

I guess what I'm trying to explain is that if the older detectors don't have any type of other target identification other than audio then its not normally thought of as digital or analog. Now on the electronic technical or scientific side of things they're may be way more that.

Mark

 

[boopyrulz]

Not sure if this is where I should post this. I am totally new to this . I hav a metal detector that was given to me . What do I look at to see what kind it is and how do I know if its any good? Any help would b greatly appreciated!! thanks Tracy

 

[Sven]

Not sure if this is where I should post this. I am totally new to this . I hav a metal detector that was given to me . What do I look at to see what kind it is and how do I know if its any good? Any help would b greatly appreciated!! thanks Tracy

What have you got, manufacturer and model-number?

 

[Cajundirtdobber]

Analog is the way to go.

 

[donl98632]

I have been detecting for about 40 years and have used many brands of detectors in that time. In my opinion I have yet to find a digital display detector that will lock on to a coin as solidly as my Whites 5900 Di Pro Sl, If the needle locks on a dime, even at depth, dig it....

 

[mortarman]

I'm an electronic technician by trade so I'm going to chime in hear. The differences between an "analog" detector and a "digital" one is the internal circuitry. An analog detector uses capacitors, resistors, diodes IC chips, etc. to operate. A digital detector uses all those components plus digital processors that hold a program along with memory chips to perform it's functions. Digital simply refers to how the processor handles the "code" or program, in digits or ones and zeros.