Menu
What's new
Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.

Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.

Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.

Click here to register!

Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.

Anyone know how many FBS frequencies the Quattro MP transmits? Andy?

Cody,
The slope is a factor, but the patent waveforms suggest that the analysis of the received waveform is much more complex than that.
HH,
Glenn
 
Bob,
That is a good question. You might want to bore yourself by reading through the thread above with my discussion on the subject with Cody.
All of my comments are based upon the review of the Minelab patent. The patent states that the detector is a time domain detector and uses a series of retangular transmitted pulses. The shape of the rectangular pulses determines the frequency spectrum of the transmitted pulses. If you make the leading and trailing edges of the pulse steeper (rise and fall times), then higher frequencies are transmitted. If the pulses have longer duration, then lower frequencies are transmitted. It is a combination of the two factors.
It could be that Minelab found that using different pulse shapes in the Explorer II improves performance. This is my thought, but I am only guessing about this.
As others have correctly stated, this whole matter may provide for interesting discussion for a few, but knowing all of this has little to do with finding good stuff in the ground.
HH,
Glenn
 
I understand and was connecting dots. I have discussed multifrequency with a number of engineers and it seems there is some difference in opinions but somewhere in all this are the answers.
However, I read your post below and agree this is far from the purpose of the site so will let it go. I will go back and look at the patents and do more than a brief scan. It is just being lazy on my part and wanting others to do it for me. After a life of reading almost nothing but technical material I have gotten lazy when it comes to really getting into the details.
Have a good one,
HH, Cody
 
Cody,
One point that may be worth considering is that what Minelab has patented is <STRONG>NOT </STRONG>the entire BBS, MPS or FBS circuit / program. The hardware end can be easily deduced and reverse engineered which is why that is patented. The software - as with many of the software companies out there - may be more protected by <STRONG>NOT </STRONG>patenting it since you have to provide a copy of the source code with the patent application. Minelab has several unique algorithims that drive their detectors that are really the heart and sole of where they are and where they are going. In talking with them, protecting the software is key to them and they feel that patents are not the only or even the best way to go to protect them. It's virtually impossible to reverse engineer a program or portions of programs when other pieces are not found on the component you are looking at.
The patent information you can obtain is useful but in order to fully understand the process for any of their technology you unfortunately need the piece that they intenationally did <STRONG>NOT </STRONG>include in the applications. I'm sure several of us "garage engineers" - myself included - would find it interesting to see under the hood of a Minelab but since the other manufacturers would probably also like to see that information, I doubt Minelab would even entertain the idea of releasing it . . . . .
Andy Sabisch
 
Excellent comments and very important. The engineers have done a great job and given us some great machines to enjoy.
I was looking at your book again, Mastering the Minelab Explorer XS & S, and thinking of the value of going back over the material afer using an Explorer. You sure have made some nice contributions to our hobby and it is appreciated. We kind of undress our minds in public when we write so it takes a lot of courage and effort.
Have a great day and we look forward to your new book.
HH, Cody
 
I believe you said this here -
Minelab has NOT has you state "simply taken an Explorer board and disabled features"
And this at minelabowners.com
"There are some internal differences in both the hardware and software that drives the unit. <span style="background-color:#ffff00;">Some of the lesser-used Explorer options have been omitted on the Quattro </span>and a new one - Trash Density - was added to provide enhanced capabilities to search trashy sites."
I dont believe that I have been spreading misinformation but I guess people should just stop trying to figure things out and just pay up for information. When is Mastering the Quattro coming out?
 
"Bing",
Glad you take the time to read every post on every forum. What I said on the Minelabowners forum was that there were some options that were omitted such as GAIN (preset), SOUNDS (which is actually still there if you know how to cross save), FAST & DEEP (which the new Trash Density is intended to address), etc. In some cases the feature was added to the Quattro just no interface provided to allow the user to modify it; i.e., remains at factory preset.
If you have tried one of the new Quattro's you will see that there are some similarities and many differences in the two units in terms of how they respond to targets and how they handle specific sites. Testing the two side-by-side has shown that there are things that each excels in despite both being FBS units. This demonstrates that the Quattro is not simply a disabled Explorer but in fact a detector that shares some features but in many aspects approaches signal detection and processing in an entireley different way thanks to the new algorithim that is used on the Quattro.
As feedback starts coming in from those that have the new detector, the differences will start to become evident and people can decide which fits their preferred hunting style.
Andy Sabisch
 
"Andy",
Your post above does not address your accusation at me. That I am spreading misinformation. I suppose this will be my last post on this matter as it appears you choose to side step the affront to which I have taken offence. I have not missed your quip "Glad you take the time to read every post on every forum". I see you find little to admire at those who seek "free knowledge".
"Bing"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top