Ralph Bryant
New member
Personally, I had earlier looked at the Garrett Ace 250, along with the Fisher I.D. Excel, and thought to myself that I would like to see the two combined, something not much larger than a Tesoro, but incorporating a larger VDI screen with numeric reading, depth reading, a good notching system, and tone I.D. Then along comes the Xterra-30. Not bad ! Always being the skeptical type and somewhat immune to the usual hype surrounding new introductions, it took me a few weeks of reading the forum comments and reviews before I decided to give one a try. I've never been one for visual I.D. machines, but have always been on the lookout for something that worked well as a casual coinshooting machine. This one may fill that bill, so I ordered one to give it a test drive.
The features that attracted me to this particular machine (Xterra-30), based only on what I've read and seen in the forums, Minelab literature, and promotional DVD at this point, are really three-fold. But in an overall sense, I think the pure simplicity of the design is what I liked most. With a simple 3-tone I.D. system, using such a machine is basically a matter of listening for the target tone to give you an idea as to the general range of conductivity, and then going to the screen to further inspect the possibilities based on the V.D.I. numeric readout. Step three then simply becomes further analysis of the audio characteristics (not tone) to determine if you are getting a consistent enough signal for it to represent a good or desirable target..... what some refer to as the "L-L-L" hunting process, or Listen-Look-Listen. Not a new concept by any means, but with a machine such as this, something that may be seen as complicated by newcomers is made more simple and easy to understand.
With so much more technology and complexity in some of the upper-end detectors these days, it sometimes seems like perhaps things are stretched too far at times, and users can easily get caught up in the so called "paralysis by analysis" syndrome, spending more time riding the machine than actually finding and digging targets. Understanding of course that there are those who are more into the detectors than the detecting (I think we've all been there or still are
), obviously there are others who don't care how they work, as long as they do, and don't want to spend any more time than necessary in setting up or keeping a detector tuned for optimal performance. Others fall anywhere between the extremes.
Steve H. recently made a very good post regarding the resolution of V.D.I. segments, bringing up some excellent points on the capabilities and consistency of machines with either very "coarse" segments (ex: the Fisher CZs with what amounts to a 7 segment visual I.D. system), the Xterra type systems with a slightly more expanded range of segments, on up to the DFX or Explorer type range of segments at the upper (or most refined) end of the scale. As imprecise as V.D.I. "lock-on" remains in many machines, are we really better off with the most refined scale, the coarsest, or something that operates very well in between ? Steve made a comment to the affect that as the resolution tightens along these scales, or is reduced in individual segments, "lock-on" often becomes (or at least appears to become) much more uniform and consistent than we might expect from a high resolution segment machine. There can obviously be advantages and disadvantages either way, but when I considered the segmenting of the Xterras and their better perceived accuracy in lock-on of targets, Steve's comments really made a lot of sense. After all, again, we are just using tone I.D. and segmenting as two of several indicators to help us in determining if a target response is of the sort we are interested in digging. Somewhere in between "under-analysis" and "over-analysis", there would seem to be a happy medium that provides for a good degree of possible target information while simplifying the task of listening to dozens of different tones or multiples of bouncing V.D.I. numbers. That was another drawing point in favor of the Xterra in my opinion, with the break-points between mid-conductivity targets and higher conductivity coins in the tone segments being another. I would just rather not have the coin signals breaking between two different tones on the high end (not including mid-range nickels).
I have always preferred a quality built machine over a not-so quality built machine, all other things being equal in the way of performance, and have never hesitated in spending extra dollars for better quality and durability. There are machines on the market that simply appear "Chinese built", regardless of the fact that some of those are produced right here in the states. Others, regardless too of where the components are produced or assembled, exude a feeling of quality that just seem to "out-class" others. Call it "pride in ownership" if you will. There are those who don't particularly care if their detector looks like a broomsitck and pie plate, as long as it gets the job done. Others of us like a machine that looks as good as it performs. Some look like World War I surplus, while others keep their machines well cleaned after every hunt. To me, Minelab falls into the later category of top-shelf quality, while others retain their toy look and feel. Nothing good or bad, right or wrong if the underlying performance is there...... just a personal preferrence each of us makes.
I also think Minelab has pulled off somewhat of an excellent marketing and public relations coup in the way they handled the introduction of the new Xterras to the marketplace. The release of several machines to those willing to give them a good workover and spread the word, good or bad, across the internet forums and chatrooms has accomplished much in the way of building interest in these machines to a higher level than I have seen with other introductions in recent years. We've seen a no-holds-barred marketing approach that has allowed the detecting public to publicize the machine in its own way and in its own time, "Simple Perfection" in a start-up marketing campaign that other manufacturers might well take note of for future release referrence.
All-in-all, the Xterra seems to continue to capture the attention and interest of many knowledgable and experienced "detectorists" and newbies alike. And that can only ultimately be good for our collective hobby. This hobby can be as simple and enjoyable, or as confusing and frustrating as we want to make it. Putting the "FUN" back into your detecting is just a matter of seeking out the right equipment to do so. For some of us, it's well past time......
Just a few thoughts......
Ralph
The features that attracted me to this particular machine (Xterra-30), based only on what I've read and seen in the forums, Minelab literature, and promotional DVD at this point, are really three-fold. But in an overall sense, I think the pure simplicity of the design is what I liked most. With a simple 3-tone I.D. system, using such a machine is basically a matter of listening for the target tone to give you an idea as to the general range of conductivity, and then going to the screen to further inspect the possibilities based on the V.D.I. numeric readout. Step three then simply becomes further analysis of the audio characteristics (not tone) to determine if you are getting a consistent enough signal for it to represent a good or desirable target..... what some refer to as the "L-L-L" hunting process, or Listen-Look-Listen. Not a new concept by any means, but with a machine such as this, something that may be seen as complicated by newcomers is made more simple and easy to understand.
With so much more technology and complexity in some of the upper-end detectors these days, it sometimes seems like perhaps things are stretched too far at times, and users can easily get caught up in the so called "paralysis by analysis" syndrome, spending more time riding the machine than actually finding and digging targets. Understanding of course that there are those who are more into the detectors than the detecting (I think we've all been there or still are
), obviously there are others who don't care how they work, as long as they do, and don't want to spend any more time than necessary in setting up or keeping a detector tuned for optimal performance. Others fall anywhere between the extremes.Steve H. recently made a very good post regarding the resolution of V.D.I. segments, bringing up some excellent points on the capabilities and consistency of machines with either very "coarse" segments (ex: the Fisher CZs with what amounts to a 7 segment visual I.D. system), the Xterra type systems with a slightly more expanded range of segments, on up to the DFX or Explorer type range of segments at the upper (or most refined) end of the scale. As imprecise as V.D.I. "lock-on" remains in many machines, are we really better off with the most refined scale, the coarsest, or something that operates very well in between ? Steve made a comment to the affect that as the resolution tightens along these scales, or is reduced in individual segments, "lock-on" often becomes (or at least appears to become) much more uniform and consistent than we might expect from a high resolution segment machine. There can obviously be advantages and disadvantages either way, but when I considered the segmenting of the Xterras and their better perceived accuracy in lock-on of targets, Steve's comments really made a lot of sense. After all, again, we are just using tone I.D. and segmenting as two of several indicators to help us in determining if a target response is of the sort we are interested in digging. Somewhere in between "under-analysis" and "over-analysis", there would seem to be a happy medium that provides for a good degree of possible target information while simplifying the task of listening to dozens of different tones or multiples of bouncing V.D.I. numbers. That was another drawing point in favor of the Xterra in my opinion, with the break-points between mid-conductivity targets and higher conductivity coins in the tone segments being another. I would just rather not have the coin signals breaking between two different tones on the high end (not including mid-range nickels).
I have always preferred a quality built machine over a not-so quality built machine, all other things being equal in the way of performance, and have never hesitated in spending extra dollars for better quality and durability. There are machines on the market that simply appear "Chinese built", regardless of the fact that some of those are produced right here in the states. Others, regardless too of where the components are produced or assembled, exude a feeling of quality that just seem to "out-class" others. Call it "pride in ownership" if you will. There are those who don't particularly care if their detector looks like a broomsitck and pie plate, as long as it gets the job done. Others of us like a machine that looks as good as it performs. Some look like World War I surplus, while others keep their machines well cleaned after every hunt. To me, Minelab falls into the later category of top-shelf quality, while others retain their toy look and feel. Nothing good or bad, right or wrong if the underlying performance is there...... just a personal preferrence each of us makes.
I also think Minelab has pulled off somewhat of an excellent marketing and public relations coup in the way they handled the introduction of the new Xterras to the marketplace. The release of several machines to those willing to give them a good workover and spread the word, good or bad, across the internet forums and chatrooms has accomplished much in the way of building interest in these machines to a higher level than I have seen with other introductions in recent years. We've seen a no-holds-barred marketing approach that has allowed the detecting public to publicize the machine in its own way and in its own time, "Simple Perfection" in a start-up marketing campaign that other manufacturers might well take note of for future release referrence.
All-in-all, the Xterra seems to continue to capture the attention and interest of many knowledgable and experienced "detectorists" and newbies alike. And that can only ultimately be good for our collective hobby. This hobby can be as simple and enjoyable, or as confusing and frustrating as we want to make it. Putting the "FUN" back into your detecting is just a matter of seeking out the right equipment to do so. For some of us, it's well past time......
Just a few thoughts......
Ralph