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.

multi frequency

Picketwire

Active member
I would like to know why simultaneous multifrequency detectors are the rage at this time. I would prefer responses from electrical engineers or designers of metal detectors. Why, when the Fisher CZ series came out, did they not "obsolete" their competitors, why are the new ones so much better than the CZ series, and why are they so much better than anything else. I am pretty sure they are better in salt water and would like to know why. I would also appreciate it if people who own both smf and single frequency detectors would reply. I would not appreciate remarks about how mine is better than yours or proofs that come from advertising. Help me out!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BW

Tony-Ok

Well-known member
I don’t feel like anything on the market right now has obsoleted other detectors.That four letter word that comes to mind is HYPE !! Sales pitch !! There are many good detectors available right now !!! I still use a Cz and I continue to make great finds !!!! You really have to take the time to get to know how a particular detector works and when and why to make adjustments to maximize performance. I will still try new detectors. I test everything against my CZ as it’s my primary detector! I also use an ORX and a ML540.
 

Picketwire

Active member
Seem like no matter how I answer this it won't be good enough?.
If you own both or are an engineer, why would you feel that way? If you own both I want to know why. If you own only one, I do not want your opinion. I am not looking to start arguments, I just want to know what the advantages and disadvantages are. If you feel like your answer would not be good enough then it probably isn't. I am curious to know why you feel this way. If jim tn is tennesee sharpshooter, I know you own both and I very much would appreciate your advice. I know you have been hammered on your testing the Impact and wish to avoid that. If you feel like u2robert or that your answer will cause controversy, please send me a private message. I do not own one to know its advantages and if they would help me personally. It is a lot of money to try one just to find out. I am not here to beat anyone over the head.
I don’t feel like anything on the market right now has obsoleted other detectors.
I apologize for "obsoleted" but that is some of the bs that is going around that I do not want. I would think answering my questions would put this to rest.

If you feel like your answer is not good enough, I don't want it. If you are worried about causing a ruckus, pm me. I promise not to reveal what you said. I am not doing this to cause division. I want to know why one should be my next purchase, but with all the hype, how am I supposed to know? I have not had the experience or opportunity to hunt all the different places with all the different detectors that other people here have. I thought this was the place to find out why. If it is not, I will search for some place that is. If you think that my post is bad, I will ask the administrator to delete it. If it turns into mudslinging, I will ask to delete it any way.

If you don't want to help, that is your choice. If you want to help but fear backlash, pm me. If you want to advertise your brand, I don't want your help. Thank you for your time.
 
Last edited:

BigTony

Well-known member
I would like to know why simultaneous multifrequency detectors are the rage at this time. I would prefer responses from electrical engineers or designers of metal detectors. Why, when the Fisher CZ series came out, did they not "obsolete" their competitors, why are the new ones so much better than the CZ series, and why are they so much better than anything else. I am pretty sure they are better in salt water and would like to know why. I would also appreciate it if people who own both smf and single frequency detectors would reply. I would not appreciate remarks about how mine is better than yours or proofs that come from advertising. Help me out!
Picket, this post struck me as funny, are there any electrical engineers or designers of metal detectors on this site? I would be amazed if so

Picket, I am wondering why you wouldn’t want actual field recoveries made by experienced detectorists Over say ten years or so?
What state do you live in?
Tony NJ
 

Picketwire

Active member
Picket, this post struck me as funny, are there any electrical engineers or designers of metal detectors on this site? I would be amazed if so
Didn't woof used to post here. I've seen Alper posts from Nokta. If Sven is not an electrical engineer he is close enough. If there are not engineers or designers here, I would wonder why.

Picket, I am wondering why you wouldn’t want actual field recoveries made by experienced detectorists Over say ten years or so?
What state do you live in?
I live in Colorado but do not see what difference that makes.

I don't know why you say I don't want actual field recoveries. I would welcome them if the person making the discovery use both types of detector. If they used both before recovering, that would be the most significant to me.

I have seen and read about "actual field recoveries" by experienced detectorists. Some use smf, some sf, some ssf. Some of the time, they say "this new one allowed me to find all kinds of things I couldn't find before". Is this the reason why; the technology is better? I love to see "actual field recoveries made by experienced detectorists", but I know that they use all the different technologies and they all seem to work. I don't know why some use smf technologies., I don't own one. I know why we do not use BFO detectors in spite of being able to detect coins underneath nails. I don't know why people use simultaneous frequency machines because I do not own one. If there is a logical reason why I should have one I want to know. How does watching Gary from XP detectors make finds help me know why the one he is using better than say a Minelab? How does reading about finds from a person who uses a Minelab help me know why Minelab is better. If it finds silver better, and some think it does, is it because of the slower recovery time, the more understandable signals, the smf, or some other reason? Simply put, does watching or reading really tell me why one is better than the other? I want to know the advantages of both from people who actually use both and I know they exist. I have seen some who have switched and belittled their old ones. This is not what I am searching for. It seem more meaningful if the detectorists still use both technologies.
 

irnwrkr

Active member
i used to want the latest and greatest detectors as soon as they are released, Ive also had nearly every top of the line machine out there. You have to get over the target, your machine needs to be set correctly. Other than that i dont know what else to say about it.
 

BigTony

Well-known member
Didn't woof used to post here. I've seen Alper posts from Nokta. If Sven is not an electrical engineer he is close enough. If there are not engineers or designers here, I would wonder why.


I live in Colorado but do not see what difference that makes.

I don't know why you say I don't want actual field recoveries. I would welcome them if the person making the discovery use both types of detector. If they used both before recovering, that would be the most significant to me.

I have seen and read about "actual field recoveries" by experienced detectorists. Some use smf, some sf, some ssf. Some of the time, they say "this new one allowed me to find all kinds of things I couldn't find before". Is this the reason why; the technology is better? I love to see "actual field recoveries made by experienced detectorists", but I know that they use all the different technologies and they all seem to work. I don't know why some use smf technologies., I don't own one. I know why we do not use BFO detectors in spite of being able to detect coins underneath nails. I don't know why people use simultaneous frequency machines because I do not own one. If there is a logical reason why I should have one I want to know. How does watching Gary from XP detectors make finds help me know why the one he is using better than say a Minelab? How does reading about finds from a person who uses a Minelab help me know why Minelab is better. If it finds silver better, and some think it does, is it because of the slower recovery time, the more understandable signals, the smf, or some other reason? Simply put, does watching or reading really tell me why one is better than the other? I want to know the advantages of both from people who actually use both and I know they exist. I have seen some who have switched and belittled their old ones. This is not what I am searching for. It seem more meaningful if the detectorists still use both technologies.
Picket, soil is different no matter where you go, so you need to adjust to your environmen but that’s besides your point.
Maybe you should contact those scientific/engineers directly, better yet called and let us know what they tell you.
I owned a CZ 7 and loved it for a few years. That dam thing made me dig more dimes because of the tightness of the screen vdi.
I dug dimes I didn’t think we’re good but out came barbers that were worn very thin. My problem with the CZ7 was ground balance; I always struggled with it and never knew if it was good or off. But still a good coin shooting machine.
When minelab came out with FBS machine I didn’t bite right away, I waited for folks to review in New Jersey dirt or sand.
After awhile results came in and man those guys were kicking my pants With recoveries, (this is my experience from observing finds displayed at metal detecting meetings).
You should do the same - go to some meetings and see what is being found and with which machines, that way you have a good idea of what works in your area and with your own detecting knowledge.
I have been detecting since 1991, no expert but have many hours of field and or asking the same question as you…..why? Which is the best?
After using my ExpII for over ten years I bought the NOX. I loved the knew technology and for me it was an easy crossover (being a minelab hunter for some time).
You going from a CZ to a Minelab will have a learning curve. But there are books and how to online. Not the stuff where a guy finds a merc, the ones that explain how too Or how it works.
Now for me a Multi frequency is exciting because they made a change to the existing software of the FBS. Full Ban Spectrums sent out many frequencies at the same time, like my EXPII did. Now the NOX sends out similar frequencies but in a different pattern, so to speak.
Is it better than a CZ, well that depends on the user not the machine. I enjoy minelab and try real hard to understand what it’s telling me but that’s me thinking out of the box.
Now, you need a test garden and a friend who has a NOX, then you both test your machines over those targets and compare. There is one guy who lives in the south and compares his test garden to many machines and puts that stuff on YouTube his name online is calabash digger. His soil is mild so understand yours is probably more mineralized, I would think but could be wrong. They used to mine in Colorado like lead, gold and stuff.
This might help and might not, I hope others can chime in to assist you in the same questions we all have.
Best of luck, get out and enjoy this crazy hobby!
Tony
 

Picketwire

Active member
Thank you Big. There are no meetings near where I live in the desert of Colorado. The only ones I know near here are a young kid with the cheapest bounty hunter vlf who followed me around and dug where I told him to look, a person my age with a higher priced bounty hunter, and finally, one who is pretty successful with a Bounty Hunter Maverick. I had to do a search, I never heard of it before. I see you assume that I have a CZ but I do not. I do not know anyone who owns any kind of minelab, garrett multifrequency, or fisher CZ. Calabash digger is certainly one who I hoped would post here as well as Monte, tennesee sharpshooter and anyone else who both have and use both. After thinking about it, I can see why they don't want to post as someone else will come along and start an argument. After thinking about it, I can see that the actual designers would not like to disclose anything that would give out trade secrets or show partiality, like Alper, between different products from the same company. I do have a test garden and have tried many other different tests between the ones I own but I do not have an smf one to compare. I consider the ones I have to be very proficient for what I ask of them individually. I do not want to take a big hit getting rid of any of them and buying a new one and then find out it is no more effective or wasn't a better "fit" than the one or ones I had to get rid of the afford the new one. I see people all over the forums that buy a new latest greatest model and sell them, usually at a loss because of whatever reason. I cannot afford that. I am not rich enough to try them all. As such, a person who has both and use both carry much more weight to me than one who found one better than the one they had before.

Thank you for your reply.
 

BigTony

Well-known member
You did speak of CZs in your original post, apologies for my assumption. Your in a desert environment, you should contact folks in same, or dealers in your area and Nevada.
Some if them post on this forum under Minelab and other forums.
Maybe repost your questions on those specific forums.
Me I like minelab, they are good for me but that’s me.
Stay well and keep detecting,enjoy the hobby.
Tony
 

relicmeister

Well-known member
Interesting question here. My thinking is unless SMF is a real game changer like salt water or highly mineralized soil like Culpepper, as long as you’re using a well designed modern detector there are other factors bigger than the difference between single frequency and simultaneous multi frequency. Research leading to good site choice, skill and familiarity with your machine, coil choice all probably Trump this difference. At least this is my opinion.
 

straker

Active member
My experience with the smf units is that they go deeper and more accurate ID at depth in heavily mineralized ground. I used both the Minelab Explorer XS and II. Both found some deeper goodies for me than any single frequency unit I used at that time(2001-2005). I can testify that the FBS(full band spectrum) really works and Minelab's exclusive noise cancel feature has helped me line my pouch with the older,deeper coins. I currently use 2 explorers and a couple Vanquish models. The Vanquish units are now my 'grab and go' units due to weight and a bit faster sweep speed.
 

Monte

Well-known member
I would like to know why simultaneous multifrequency detectors are the rage at this time.
I would not say SMF is the rage. just that there is a lot of interest in them that we especially see on Internet forms. I am in contact with a lot of Hobbyists as well as Avid Detectorists daily, and many who are active and in clubs or small 'groups' and we discuss detectors and coils and operating frequencies.

With your posted inquiry I did some checking:

5%, or 1- out-20, use one or more detectors exclusively that are SMF. They no longer own or use a Single-Frequency detector.

20% of us own and use one or more SMF detectors, but we also have and use one or more Single-Fequency VLF detectors. When asked, all of us stated that we often select a Single-Frequency with our SMF device, or we actually used a Single-Frequency detector as much or more than the SMF models. A lot that was site dependent.


Therefore, as you can figure, 75% of us do not have an SMF detector and most of them are not really that interested in one either.


I would prefer responses from electrical engineers or designers of metal detectors. Why, when the Fisher CZ series came out, did they not "obsolete" their competitors, why are the new ones so much better than the CZ series, and why are they so much better than anything else. I am pretty sure they are better in salt water and would like to know why. I would also appreciate it if people who own both smf and single frequency detectors would reply.
I would not say all the SMF models are better than what came prieviously, they're not better than everything else on the market now, and they aren't really going to obsolete anything. They are just another metal detector that are going to be able to do whatever they are designed to do within their limitations and they all have their limitations.

Monte

PS: Let me add that quite a few do acknowledge that sometimes Frequency selection can play a role in performance based on the site searched, therefore we own different Single-Frequency detectors at an assortment of Frequencies .. or ... they own a Selectable Single -Frequency detector or two such as the Nokta Impact, Multi- Kruger or Anfibio Multi, or an XP Deus or ORX.

S:
 
Last edited:

Monte

Well-known member
I got some good replies from experts on a different website. If anyone is interested start a conversation.
"Experts" ???? Care to share the names of those 'Experts' and how you determined them to qualify for that rating? Very, very few metal detector design engineers post on any forums or answer open forum questions. There's only one I can think of and I'm certain a lot of readers would like to know WHO had WHAT to say about this topic.

Monte
 

BigTony

Well-known member
I got some good replies from experts on a different website. If anyone is interested start a conversation.
Picket, please share whatever you feel is interesting. Maybe they explained why multi is the new thing?
is it because of better response in many different soils?
Tony
 

Picketwire

Active member
I don't know if it is right to quote someone from another forum. The post is titled SMF-contender or pretender. It has to do with comparing phase shift angles at different frequencies to help see targets "in the matrix".
 

Picketwire

Active member
Care to share the names of those 'Experts' and how you determined them to qualify for that rating?
No. I believe it is against forum rules to mention other forums. I am sure an internet search will reveal the source and I know that you complained about him saying he recovered a dime head up if that helps.
 

Picketwire

Active member
I would not say SMF is the rage. just that there is a lot of interest in them that we especially see on Internet forms.
Okay, not the rage, just a lot of interest.
most of them are not really that interested in one either.
I can't divine the interest of most people but in the Minelab forum, the makro/nokta forum, and the Garrett forum there seems to be a lot of interest. I've seen on the Deus forum people wanting XP to produce one. There are people on the Fisher forum complaining that they do not have a new SMF detector. I just want to know why and would it be to my advantage to purchase one.
I would not say all the SMF models are better than what came prieviously, they're not better than everything else on the market now, and they aren't really going to obsolete anything. They are just another metal detector that are going to be able to do whatever they are designed to do within their limitations and they all have their limitations.
You are one of the experts (at detecting, not engineering) I was hoping would respond by telling me what advantages and limitations there are between the two as I know you own both. Though you responded at length, you said nothing about the limitations.
they aren't really going to obsolete anything
I apologized for using the word "obsolete" in an earlier posting and reported myself in an attempt to get the thread deleted because of the incendiary language I used in the first post.
 
Top