Auditory vs Visual - Do sounds still matter as much?

[parkgt]

How important are the auditory settings and alerts to use of the CT compared to the visual?

Back in the day, auditory feedback is all detectors offered and many of the old hands got very adept at interpreting that information from the analog and the early digital machines.More recently screens and the visual information provided have made it so operators are not solely dependent on the art of listening carefully.

The CTX now offers ways of controlling the sounds that may improve or decrease the usefulness of those sounds depending on how the machine is set up.

How many can or do set their CTX in a ways that allows deep signals to

 

[LandOLincoln]

In 50 multi I rarely look at the screen except to pinpoint since the wiggle back method doesn't work. When I use combine I tend to check the screen quite often but I still dig the vast majority of targets that give audio responses in 2 of my four bins. The other two bins I dig maybe 1/4th of the targets depending on the site. If I'm in a field site that is older than 1900s I'll dig all the conductive signals just so I don't have to hear them again later. I've managed quite a few neat buttons that hit all over the place. Not to mention other old curious whatsits.

 

[parkgt]

LandO,

From what you say, it doesn't seem that how you have set up Gain and Volume Limit matter much. You are digging and whisper tones aren't a factor.

 

[scoopjohnb]

I absolutely Hate with a capital H detectors that scream out at every signal.
How am I supposed to figure out if its deep or small.

 

[parkgt]

Do you have a CTX? If so how are the gain and volume set?

 

[LandOLincoln]

In the fields I usually use deep on so it all sounds the same. In the parks the machine's default gain settings are used. Its rare to get targets that are deeper than 8 inches around here unless they've done some dirt moving. I get more thumps at the end of deep signals than whispers.

 

[Digger]

Although there is much more information "on the screen" than with any other detector I've used, and I appreciate being able to visually identify multiple targets under the coil, I still prefer to "hunt" by ear. 50 tone CO in areas with an abundance of modern trash. Combined audio in areas that are more "wide open". I will glance at the screen to confirm what my ears have heard, and to sort out the trash. But mostly just to build the anticipation prior to digging. (will it be what I think it is?) As to audio settings...... I'd be the first to admit that my hearing isn't as good as it use to be. But I don't set it up to differentiate "whisper" signals. (I never considered a target response as being a whisper. Some are just more narrow than others.) If there is something down there, I want to hear it. Over the years, I have become proficient at sizing and pinpointing. So I figure that if I keep digging straight down, I'll find what it is that beeped. I don't view it as moving beyond the "art of detecting". It is just the tactic I use to maximize my time in the field. JMHO HH Randy

 

[Andrew Kalinowski]

I use Combined (similar to Gonehunting's setup) but, I treat it mostly as an alert and first clue. I'm getting more info from the screen display than I could ever dream of gaining from the sound alone. Target trace, the splatter or solid it displays, location of the detection points (FeCo co-ordinates) are (with practice) easy to interpret. Sound gives me only secondary clues. I know that it's not the way most others hunt but, that's the way I do it and it works for me.

 

[Larry (IL)]

Over the years, I have become proficient at sizing and pinpointing. So I figure that if I keep digging straight down, I'll find what it is that beeped. I don't view it as moving beyond the "art of detecting". It is just the tactic I use to maximize my time in the field. JMHO HH Randy

This quote should be one of the ten commandments of metal detecting. Randy

Sizing your target and comparing it to the target info suggested on the screen will save you lots of time not digging the trash.

 

[aurumpro]

Gday parkgt

I use both the audio and visual about equily.
The visual is most usefull for dicriminating the good from the bad and in combination with the audio I can get way better than ever before Indacation of the target type depth and size.
The colour visual on the CTX has given me a whole new dimension to my detecting, LOVE IT

I have tryed both low and high volume gain settings and I like the Gain max in all senarios exept in very high trash areas where the trash is mostly small shallow decoposing aluminum foil or small decomposing iron type trash as you can eliminate some of the clutter signals by carefully manipulating the Gain / Sensitvity / Audio pattern settings to make the good targets stand out against the clutter.

In most other circumstances though I prefer to have the advantage of useing the audio and signal amplifyers to give me the extra depth.
Extra depth is acieved by carefull manipulation of the settings and use of the Volume gain, Recovery deep, target separation and discrimination pattern settings to amplify the good target signals that are barely audable or hidden by clutter and VERY EASILY missed.
I have no trouble hearing the fantest target though, I am a profesional gold prospector and years of using the minelab PI detectors day in day out has given me an educated ear as the faint gold signal is much harder to Identify.
But I still use the amplifyers in the CTX to give me the advantage that they provide, If youve got it why not use it !
Im looking for any edge that can give me an advantage over other operators or previous detectors.

As the depth indicator is so reliable now there is no advantage of using the high conductivety whisper sound to Identify the deep silver I just look at the indicator and 9x out of 10 its spot on.

This is the beauty of the CTX it has so many settings options for the expienced user who is willing to experiment to get the best out of any ground condition or location and find those deep or clutter hidden good targets.

Its all about experimentation, experimentation is the key to getting the most out of your detector in any given location.
As all locations have differing soil types, soil moisture content, trash densitys, trash depths, EMI conditions, topography, good target types and good target depths.
So with so many settings and so many location variables you have to constantly experiment to get the most out of your detector!

 

[Rick(ND)]

I learned detecting back in 1973 before a disc detector was made or very few around so I went by the audio and learn to tell sizes too and did well with only digging some of the rusty bottle caps and it was around the early 80 with a Teknetic 8500B that I had and visual ID. I still use my audio first then look at the visual to see what the info I can get and found this to work great on my Sovereign and the E-Trac and used it on the CTX 3030 also as I see if it is repeatable and stays in the one area, then I look at the ID number and try to keep the audio as smooth as possible, with the E-Trac I get the tone I wanted, then looked at the conductivity number and then the conductivity numbers. On the CTX I get the tone and get it to repeat and then look at the number or graph and see if I see it smearing or not to help decide to dig or not and anything that is iffy I will dig, so I do get a bit of trash too. I feel the audio is the most important myself.


Rick

 

[sonnydigs]

Great info...
Thanks..........
Sonny

 

[Buried Crap NJ]

I absolutely Hate with a capital H detectors that scream out at every signal.
How am I supposed to figure out if its deep or small.

I am not sure I understand this post? Is this referring to the CTX 3030 or just a detector you have? While the 3030 may seem to sound off loud at any target regardless of depth. I can assure you that if you get a deep target with the CTX 3030 it won't blare in you headphones. And as posted in Aurumpro post the depth meter on the 3030 is spot on to a depth of about 12 inches. The 3030 is very good at sizing and showing roundness of the target. Its has always been up to the hunter to remove those surface targets to get to the deeper targets, as the deeper targets are masked. This is the beauty of the 3030 as it will show the two targets even if you don't hear them both!
As a thought the CTX 3030 is just about to become 1 year old to most of us. This to me is not a lot of time to become one with the detector. I have well over 700hrs using it and struggled with aspects of its use along the way. I am quite sure the second year will be much better.
BCNJ

 

[parkgt]

BJNJ,

You say "I can assure you that if you get a deep target with the CTX 3030 it won't blare in you headphones."

How do you set you volume setting - gain, limit and threshold?

And "The 3030 is very good at sizing and showing roundness of the target."

What are you techniques for sizing and determining roundness?

Thanks,
Greg

 

[Big Boys Hobbies]

In my opinion, AUDIO AUDIO AUDIO!

 

[JamesM]

I hunt by ear, and use the display to verify what I'm hearing.

 

[parkgt]

In my opinion, AUDIO AUDIO AUDIO!

Bart,

Since Audio is some predominately important to you. How do you set it up your audio in a way that gives you target attribute information that many others seem to be using the screen for? What are your gain and volume settings, what tone settings and response mode are used?

It seems that many that responded primarily use the sound as alert that something is in a range they are interested in and that it repeats. The sound really doesn't provide much more info for them, the screen provides the rest.

On other machines in the past, people claimed the warbles and whispers provided important target attribute info. I don't see the same claimed very often with the CTX.

Makes me wonder if are people not setting things correctly to get that nuanced info; or do they not care because they have a screen and are using that information instead. Which is the original question.

That why when someone says audio is so important, I am interested in how they are setting things up. Maybe many are missing something?

 

[JamesM]

Parkgt,
I understand what you are asking, and with the CTX I'm sure it's possible to hunt by sound alone if you have enough time on the machine. But, I guess I'm missing your point! Why would you buy a detector like the CTX and not use the other tools that are available, such as target trace, and being able to see multiple targets, target size, type, different colored cursors for ferrous and cond. etc. on the screen at the same time you are listening to it.
If I was going to use it as you describe, I would probably opt for something using 50 tone cond, and lower the gain. But, if you turn the gain down to much, you might miss a small, deep target. Since there are so many factors at play, your hearing being the main one, I don't think anyone can tell you exactly how to set your machine.

 

[parkgt]

James,

I agree with you; and do try to use all the tools the CTX has. I use audio primarily as an alert and do the obvious of checking from several directions and listen to see if position and pin pointing remain steady. After that, the screen info is usually going to be the deciding factor for me on whether to dig or not.

In spite of that I try to set the Threshold, Gain and Volume limit in a manner that should let them try to give me more information than that of a loud alert. Yet I find in practice an alert is primarily all I seem to use the audio for.

I am hoping those that state that the audio is more beneficial than this approach suggests, will provide settings and usages that are instructive for those of us that may be missing the finer points of the audio.