Didn't mean to sound defensive there Bob, but you posted "I have 2 questions. More like a poll." and I am sorry if I didn't realize it's purpose was so you could critique or comment on others settings that you personally liked or disliked. I obviously missed that part, or you,...... yes, you didn't include that in it's general description. "By turning your gain down to 4 or 5 you have already lost a lot of signals." .......You got that from where???? Now I have sat over weak signals and changed every setting I could think of on my two different SE's, with several different size coils, trying to see if there was a telling difference, a hidden advantage to this setting verses that one, and I know as a fact that a difference in gain between 7 and 4 while using deep on, and fast off is not making people loose lots of signals as you stated, and in any trash what soever, fast off, will definitely cause people to miss targets. In fact, there is such a thing as silent masking where a simple tiny piece of foil or little metal staple too small to cause your machine to sound off can completely mask the signal of a silver dime to the point your Explorer doesn't even make a peep and in that situation, fast on does make a huge difference. Not always, but often enough that while fast is turned off, I feel like I am naked in a snow drift. If you were to ask any serious Mine lab hunter on this form, other than weight or the yet impossible depth, what improvement on their Explorer would add the most to their number of finds and they all would post faster recovery and separation of targets. Fast on, is the Explorers fastest recovery and it is still not fast enough. So people buy little coils and still that speed and separation is not enough, yet you tell them to turn fast off because it chops the signal's sound???? I thought we were looking for coins, not prettier sounds. I also know as a fact that auto sensitivity set on 32 doesn't cause people to miss dimes on the surface as people have posted, and if your unit does, send it in, cause it's broken. What I don't know, is why people make these outrageously, ignorant statements that they have heard or read in another post. And then they'll say in my test garden, blah, blah blah; I'm not talking about some cruddy test garden, I am talking about in the real world, in a real situation, with an unknown actual target, that's where these statements have to be proved to go from being ignorant theory to actual known fact. I don't mean to pick on you, or anyone else for that matter because I know guys are just posting to try and help others but unless they have actually truly done such experimentation, their blind statements are not helping as much as hindering others learning and I don't believe that's their true purpose and that's a shame. I know you are trying to help and I think it's great that you are, and you do, help, but on this one I am going to have to disagree.
