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

Initial testing results and observations

Hi everyone,

Since the Deus is new to me, I did some initial testing to give me some reference regarding what I was and/or should be hearing and concentrating on. Some or all of this information may have already been discussed in previous threads, so forgive me if I am restating information discussed previously. Beware, it is a long post.

Probably the most important thing I came away with was that to effectively use the Deus for deep targets, I will need to spend some time digging a lot of targets while really listening to the nuances of the audio response (volumes, crispness, fuzziness, brokenness, etc.). I look forward to the challenge.

The following are my results and observations (YMMV). Actual air test numbers and a diagram of my test garden are included below.

Baseline Deus settings (version 3.2):
Disc. = 0; Full Tones
Sens. = 90; TX Pwr = 2
Freq. = 8kHz
Iron Vol. = 3
Reactivity = 2; Silencer = 0
Audio Resp. = 5
Ground = Manual 88; no gnd notch added

Test garden conditions:
Air temp = 78; Humidity less than 50 percent
Surface bare, flat, no vegetation, minimal rocks (all less than
 
Dang it man, that is one impressive bit of information!

Thank you for your work and sharing......


I gotta reread it....LOL


Jim
 
Cladiator--This is a super post! I wish I had read it before I went hunting today! There are several bits of information you provided that will serve me well in some of the parks I hunt! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Couple of quick comments:

I can see where the clip attachment of the remote to the shaft will be a problem...particularly (for me anyway) if I don't align it correctly before trying to push it on.
A bigger problem is the clip attachment on the coil for charging...it's poorly designed and I've already done something to make it sit weakly in its charging position. I may contact XP for a new one.

In the parks I hunt, most, if not all the keeper targets are 5 inches and beyond. Consequently, I'll be adjusting some of my settings in accordance with your post to help me separate and hear those deep signals:

-The 8 inch deep targets were the most difficult, but they produced a consistent response that was quieter in volume and shorter in length - thus you had to swing the center of the coil directly over the target. I learned I will have to listen closely to pick out this response from all the others being produced, especially in a target rich environment. I've seen this too, especially in 4K...in trashy areas where targets are deep, it's a continuous effort to keep focused on listening.
-Full Tones (or any other tone discrimination option, for that matter) appears to be effective to a fairly limited depth I've noticed this in my area as well
-Also noted, when a deep, good, non-iron target (regardless of conductivity) was detected, the VID number consistently stayed between 98 - 00 and never ventured beyond 00 (i.e. into the iron range) - I expect this to be the case only if you have a target that is not near any iron. This is great info and I can corroborate this--it doesn't happen every time, but it's happened enough to keep an eye on it (and of course learn to just use my ears more). In my experience VIDs can get high like this even with iron close by.
-Disc. Basically, anything over about 2.5 in my ground made it more difficult to detect the 8 inch targets, regardless of Sensitivity, TX Power, Reactivity, or Silencer. I will have to test this and see if it applies in my area. I have yet to dig copper or silver coins beyond 7-8 inches with the Deus.
-Sens. I will be setting my baseline at 80 as it produced a good response without all the extra amplified transient signals. I will be trying this. I know there's plenty of discussion in forums/books on this, but in trashy areas, I can see where setting sens too high could be detrimental
-Silencer: A value of 0 produced the clearest response. A value of -1 did well also, but tended to be more broken and unstable in my soil conditions. I could not detect the 8 inch targets consistently with a value of 1 or greater. Interesting! When I want more depth, I've been setting to -1..I'll test with 0 and check for improvement.
-Audio Response: 5 worked well, but after discovering the limitations of the target ID accuracy at depth, I will probably set this value to 7 and rely on some other tricks to help me identify good versus bad targets. Are you referring to your ability to hear the deep targets or are you saying AR may help with target ID?
-one click of Ground Notch (87) seemed to help with cleaner responses in my soil. I've noticed this in my area too.

Thanks again for your tremendous work on this! I'm sure many others will find it useful too!
 
Thanks Jim--I hope some of it is useful.

Hi beepsilver,
Thanks for the comments and observations.
I was pleasantly surprised at how well the 4k improved the response to the high conductive targets at the deeper depths--although the target ID didn't improve, the audio response (quality of tone) was noticeably improved. Likewise, I was pleasantly surprise at how well 12k and 18k improved the audio response on the deep nickel. Now I just need to get an ear for the right response to help me discriminate the good from the bad.
I'd be interested in what you discover regarding the amount of discrimination and its effect on depth in your area. I didn't play too much with different values, so I probably should spend a bit more time with this setting to see how much of an effect it might have based on how much discrimination is set.
The Sensitivity setting was a real eye opener for me. I come from the school of thought that more is always better, but from what I saw in my test garden, this was definitely not the case with my soil conditions.
With the Silencer, I figured a -1 would produce the best response for deep targets based on the various videos that have been made. While the response was good, the small amount of added filtering that 0 provided was better for my conditions. I think this will be another setting that will warrant additional attention in the field based on ground mineral strength and iron content.
Regarding AR, I'm referring to strictly the ability to hear the deep target audio response as clearly as possible.

Thanks again for the comments.
---Cladiator (OR)
 
Thank you Cladiator for the in-depth analysis of your experiments! I really appreciate the hard work and effort put forth and it's all displayed in an easy-to-understand format with the VDI graphs being a nice compliment to it all!

Regarding Disc setting vs depth: Many of the factory programs will start you out at 6.8 or 10, which may be good for starting off, but once you get your ear trained to hear those nuance and whisper sounds; running lower Disc will of course enhance those sounds which means that there's added depth potential.

Just playing around one day I took a clad quarter and set it up for a "max depth" hunt. Don't remember all the settings but I DO remember that when Disc was set at "0" there was much more detection range for that quarter, and it was a consistent high tone (in full tones). Any amount of Disc applied greatly reduced sensitivity at max depth, and I think there's a post in here somewhere that illustrates this - maybe from the Finnish website.

My own findings with Disc is when running in "10" you lose about 1" max detection depth on coin sized objects vs Disc at "2.0" with NO OTHER parameters changed. I DID NOT, however, try this experiment in 4 kHz.

Sensitivity, surprisingly enough, doesn't have as much effect on depth as I thought it would in the beginning and really helps with EMI. I was able to hit 7 and 8 inch targets in 4 Khz, r2, silencer 0...while running "80" sensitivity as well. Slowing the scan speed will of course separate much better at depth in a trashy environment...reactivity of 1 is not as clear as the crisp sounds of r2 and r3.
 
Quick question -- which coil did you use for these tests? Maybe I missed it (or should remember from an earlier post of yours!), but just curious if these results were from the 9" or 11"? And very thorough testing, by the way. Kudos to you for having that test bed and approaching this exercise in that fashion. Still digesting the results. Hence my coil question.
Regards,
Rich
 
Thanks CZconnoisseur for the comments and your observations. They are very helpful. Based on my previous experience with other detectors and information documented by experienced detectorists, I agree with you and others that less discrimination will provide for maximum depth. Your observations regarding how much depth was lost with Disc @ 10 is nice to know for those days when a person doesn't want to hear all the trash targets under the coil. I wonder how much depth you loose with Disc set at 20? or 30? I think I need to do some more experimenting.:blink:
---Cladiator
 
Top