Threshold on C$

[Anonymous]

Hey all.
I use to post a lot, but been lurking for a while.
I've used the C$ EVERY sense they came out.
Trick question.
If I get a weak deep signal in a real hunt [NOT A TEST GARDEN OR AIR TEST] with my machine on 8 sens and a -10 threshold, will I always loose depth if I cut the threshold back to -20 or lower and keep the sens at 8 even if the C$ seemed stable at -10?

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Kevin,
I can't wait to read the answers.
I do not dig as many deep targets as you relic hunters do because there are that many deepies around here but, my answer is no, you will very seldom lose the target with the sensitivity on 8 or higher.
Tom

 

[Anonymous]

Kevin
I am not an expert on the C$, but from reading the manual and doing some testing, the threshold setting is a trigger point on targets. +4 is more excitable allowing targets to be acknolwdged, and -99 is less excitable ignoring targets as numbers decrease into the minus segment.
My thoughts on threshold setting are the closer that the settings are to +4, the faster the target processing information, and is designed for low to medium soil conditions. As soil conditions become more minerialized, the target processing information requires a greater length of time to id a target. The target processing time is increased as the threshold setting is decreased.
Every VLF detector on the market looses depth as minerization increases. The C$ address this problem in two ways, by threshold settings and by using the auto trac system. The best settings for using auto trac is sens at 4 to 5, and thres at -5 to -10. As soil minerializations change, one has to adjust sens and thresh to maintain max depth and target id. I think that this is the biggest challenge to using the C$, adjusting any one of its settings the wrong way will result in maximum frustration for the operator.
Sorry for the long post, but to try to answer your question. With a sens of 8 and a thresh of -10, will you loose depth if you increase thresh to -20 or lower? If soil conditions are high, you would most likley gain depth by decreasing thresh to a certian point. If soil conditions are low, you would loose depth if you decreased the thresh settings. The only way to find out which settings will give you the best results for your specific area, is to bury quarters at 2" intervials up to 12" and try different settings, but keep in mind that the C$ is sensitive to sweep speed. I have gained about 2" in my test garden just by changing my sweep speed from slow to moderate. The C$ is a strange bird, I like to think of it as the mocking bird of metal detectors. It acts like other detectors that I have used, but change a few settings and it acts like a whole different detector. Hope this helps, its only one opinion. TB

 

[Anonymous]

OK.
I have found that my machine will gain depth on deep unplanted coins by lowering the threshold if there are any trash targets [especially iron]anywhere near the deep coin. I set my machine up by finding a weak signal at the site I am hunting and adjusting the threshold for the strongest signal. Many times I got a much better signal by lowering the threshold and keeping the sens. up as high as possible. I double check several targets to make sure I have the best settings. I have proven to myself that any shallow target [especially iron] anywhere near the coil, will kill the depth on deep targets with higher threshold settings,[ even when I'm not hearing a signal off the shallow targets because of it not being under the coil.] I run my machine in 0 disk and know by the noise from iron and trash when to cut the threshold back. I've seen -50 beat -5 on depth badly even when both seemed stable. I do try and keep the sens. as high as I can. It seems to me that the threshold changes the output signal from the coil uncontrolable on all other detectors I've used, and the sens. is the return signal like every other detector. THAT'S JUST MY GUESS.
It's tough to find a deep target with nothing near it in most all areas I hunt, and the beat settings for depth in my test garden didn't prove to be the best in lots of other areas.
Try it, and let us know how it goes.
HH'n

 

[Anonymous]

Kevin
Interesting post, I thought about the threshold adjustment after I made my post and to be honest it did not add up. It appears that the threshold setting works more like a discriminate function, instead of having to do with target id processing speed. After reading your second post, I thought this makes sence, because +4 is more excitable accepting more targets and -99 is less excitable ignoring more targets.
I wonder if the C$ threshold settings consist of a standard course setting SAT, that can be fine tuned using +4 to -99, with software designed more for targets instead of soil conditions. Ok guys, what do you think. TB

 

[Anonymous]

You are one of a very few C$ users that prefer to hear all the iron. I always ran the CZ in 0 disc to hear the iron but have found that with the C$ I prefer to knock out small nails and just hear the larger stuff.
If you take the explanation of the threshold function in the manual literally what you are hearing as a better signal may actually be a result of reducing the amount of weaker trash signals which makes the target appear to sound louder when in actuality it is just easier to hear?? I dunno, but I am willing to try your method especially if it hits the deeper stuff in iron as you indicated.
When I use high sensitivity settings in iron I have to really slow down so that all the sounds the C$ produces register to my ears otherwise, I am overwhelmed by all the input. My preferred method is to use lower sensitivity with a threshold of -5 or 0 as this allows you to work it a little faster and still hear the good stuff. The C$ is lighting quick in recovery so it does not neccessarily require an ultra slow sweep to pick stuff out of iron ergo I prefer a lower sensitivity setting.
Tom

 

[Anonymous]

Tom,
I think your first post was mostly correct other than the processing thing. I have noticed at a few sites that with a threshold of +1 I get some weak spurious sounds that I attribute to mineralization "noise" and the ground here is not all that hot.
In your conditions at high sensitivity settings I would think that may cause problems in the hearing of good signals and a more negative threshold might go a long way in allowing the use of higher sensitivity settings. Sort of akin to the White's Goldmasters where it is a balancing act between sensitivity and SAT to get best performance in tough conditions.
Tom

 

[Anonymous]

I think we are closing in on this rascal, the threshold system is like a Goldmaster, the tracking system acts like the LST and the MXT, which both have the same daddy, Engineer David Johnson. This I know because I talked to him one day about 2 years ago. The id system acts like a DFX pedigree. Hi tech German digital software engineering and a little George Pane auto trac and auto ground balance.
Jackpine We are on the ball, now if we can just figure out what all of this means and how to dial this cotton picker in, we are bound to find something of value. TB

 

[Anonymous]

and I have talked to several that have used them in some of the worst ground in the US, is that without exception, they could all run high sensitivity settings and still have a stable operating machine that ID's ferrous from non-ferrous as good as or better than anything out there.
Tom

 

[Anonymous]

The place that I found the 1887 silver dollar was real bad soil, the creak next to the old homesite has black sand all over it. The C$ ran smooth as silk, my MXT and XS both had false signals, I think proper ground balance and running the C$ in auto trac until hitting a solid targer made a big differenc.
The one thing that I noticed was that if I did not turn auto trac off once I hit a target, the auto trac would trac the target out. It's like the ground balance locks once the auto trac is turned off.
I am going back to the old home site this weekend if the weather permits and try playing with the threshold settings. TB

 

[Anonymous]

When I first started out, I thought the sensitivity setting was a gain control. I have since learned that is more like a squelch control for noise. You set the squelch to where the background noise isn't audible, which also determines how strong a signal has to be in order to break squelch and give an audio. Seems to me the threshold does the same thing, only at a finer level.
I'm thinking sensitivity is the coarse adjustment and threshold is the fine adjustment?
Or sensitivity could be a pre-amp gain, and the threshold is the actual squelch control?
How far off am I?
HH
Mike

 

[Anonymous]

Mike I think you are real close, the thrershold setting appears to be a fine tune adjustment to accept or ignore targets. One thing for sure it's the best detector that I have used in areas that have a combo of high trash and minerialized soil.
I sure would like to see the Engineers report on this bad boy. Super fast target id, target seperation, discrimination settings, auto ground balance, and auto ground trac, that can all be fine tuned by the operator.
One seting that I have used is to set thresh to +1 just to give a slight hum, then increase sens to the positive until it starts becomimg unstable, then back off by one number. I then lower thresh to -5 or -10. After reviewing these post I am going to experiment with the thresh settings next time I go hunting. I will set up the C$ and when I hit a good target, I am going to play with the thresh settings before I dig it. TB

 

[Anonymous]

I really should play with threshold more myself before I dig good signals. One time I DID experiment with the sensitivity before I dug a deepie target at a cellar hole. I simply kept dropping it down, sweeping again, dropped it down, etc....from 7 all the way to 1. I was sorta amazed that even on sensitivity 1 I still got a signal I would have dug. Weaker than the 7 of course, but a signal from all angles. I believe the thresh was around -10 or so. The target turned out to be a small colonial button, & a fun little experiment. Now if the snow continues to melt, I'll try some threshold experimentation....again, great posts! <img src="/metal/html/smile.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt="">

 

[Anonymous]

Tried it out on the only test coin I can get to due to snow. The ground is frozen solid but I was able to locate a dime I have buried on edge at around 6" in moderate iron (my yard is full of the stuff)
First off let me point out that 8" coils as a rule do not do well on this particular target, the 9" and larger sizes hit it much better. Coils such as white's 950, the X5's 9" and Fishers 10.5" hit it much better than the 8" and smaller sizes.
Anyway, I played around a lot with the settings and finally settled on sensitivity 7 and threshold -30 as giving the best indication while walking all around the target. It was blanked by the iron from a couple directions but overall the response with those settings I felt was best. BTW this dime has been buried for over 3 years.
Tom

 

[Anonymous]

Sounds like you saw what I was talking about.
I've dug targets in the past with high threshold levels that I wouldn't get any response from the target on top of the ground because of other targets in the area. The strangest and hardest thing for me to understand was, the near by targets wasn't close enough to cause a signal, but they caused the loss of the signal I was after with the high threshold settings. This dosn't happen the way I set my C$ up now.
HH'n

 

[Anonymous]

Give it a try when you can. I set the machine up for the site by real testing on the first few weak signals. The only time I try and get the High settings are in clean areas like some farm fields and then I'm using All Metal mode.
HH'n