Videos of detector testing.

[Doug]

Videos of detector testing.

I have spent several hours looking at videos from the detector testing team. I want to thank them for making and sending me the videos.

What an eye opener they are, particularly the 4500 v 5000 testing!

To see both detectors when using 18 inch mono coils unable to detect a 30 oz nugget at 2 feet deep in enhance or fine gold was quite amazing, as was the inability of the 5000 to detect a 1oz nugget at 14”in using fine gold!   Both could just get this nugget in enhance.

Note.  With fine gold or enhance, if a nugget is on edge you may well get a fair response at this depth. Yet when using either of these timings you are likely to miss big gold at depth if the orientation is not suitable, i.e. on its flat.

I also failed to see the depth advantage in the 5000 or why any nugget hunter would want to trade up from a good 4500 to the 5000?

The 5000 is a little smoother, and has a slightly sharper yet quieter signal response and may GB slightly more quickly, but other than this I can't see anything that would justify its price or why any nugget hunter who has a good 4500 would want to upgrade!

In my view the new fine gold is ok if you are after Fly Sh!t, but the depth advantage on big gold deep is just a gimmick, just more spin and hype!

doug
 
 

[aufinda]

Doug,
Are you saying that in Enhance, nuggets with a large surface area will be missed while smaller targets will be detected....that's scary!!!

[Doug]

Doug,
Are you saying that in Enhance, nuggets with a large surface area will be missed while smaller targets will be detected....that's scary!!!

Yes that appears to be the case with  some larger, flatter nuggets in enhance and fine gold from memory.You may well get no response on a large flat nugget lying flat but when you turn it so that its edge is presented to the detector then  you may get a good response! In normal timings the effect  appears to much less noticeable. The other thing that stood out was that NF coils were clearly very much better than ML commander coils for depth and signal response when tested on the same nuggets!
Many other things also came as real surprise to me as well, eg the huge effect that the stabilizer setting/ TX frequency /gain have on the signal response of some nuggets.Have the wrong settings for a particular timing and viola the nugget signal disappears! ::54:: How a user is supposed to know what settings are optimal for a particular timing/ground conditions/ coil type and size etc is beyond me!
doug

[aufinda]

Its a worry, makes me wonder how much gold I've left behind, at least I use a couple Nuggetfinder coils.

[Doug]

Its a worry, makes me wonder how much gold I've left behind, at least I use a couple Nuggetfinder coils.

When you cannot detect a 30 oz nugget lying flat at 24" in enhance or fine gold but detect it easily in normal timings then perhaps their is a message here? I should  also say that we don't see this nugget "edge" effect with the QED which detected the 30oz nugget a 24" ok whether flat or on edge.
doug
PS to any of the testers if I have got any of this wrong please jump in and tell me because I am relying only on the videos and my memory and i don't want to give any wrong info!

[Doug]

Videos of detector testing.

I have spent several hours looking at videos from the detector testing team. I want to thank them for making and sending me the videos.

What an eye opener they are, particularly the 4500 v 5000 testing!

To see both detectors when using 18 inch mono coils unable to detect a 30 oz nugget at 2 feet deep in enhance or fine gold was quite amazing, as was the inability of the 5000 to detect a 1oz nugget at 14”in using fine gold!   Both could just get this nugget in enhance.

Note.  With fine gold or enhance, if a nugget is on edge you may well get a fair response at this depth. Yet when using either of these timings you are likely to miss big gold at depth if the orientation is not suitable, i.e. on its flat.

I also failed to see the depth advantage in the 5000 or why any nugget hunter would want to trade up from a good 4500 to the 5000?

The 5000 is a little smoother, and has a slightly sharper yet quieter signal response and may GB slightly more quickly, but other than this I can't see anything that would justify its price or why any nugget hunter who has a good 4500 would want to upgrade!

In my view the new fine gold is ok if you are after Fly Sh!t, but the depth advantage on big gold deep is just a gimmick, just more spin and hype!

doug
 
 

A new member here would like what I have posted to be verified by someone that was actually at the testing. So could someone please do this for me as i only have the videos and was NOT present at the testing.
doug

[Flapjack]

Doug what I have read on your forum is quite interesting to me.
I have dug some deep gold with my 4000 in S/S.
I can't even imagine missing a 30ozer at 2ft.with the 4500 in enhanced.
If I might ask what the setting were on the detector?
I now have a 4500 and my best to date with it was a soild 15gram piece at 18"
with a 12x18 coiltek GS mono
I'm going to run over my patches with the detector in Normal timings with a DD coil
as the ground is too hot with a mono.
I will post my findings.

Will you post the videos soon???

[Alluvium]

Hi Doug,

I done some of the testing on the M/labs in the videos, and nine other very experienced operators joined in over these times as well.

So there were no smoke and mirrors used, this actually happened.

Flapjack, the M/lab detectors were set to the ultimate settings in both Enhance, Fine gold and Normal.

Cheers  Alluvium.

[Flapjack]

Ultimate settings Can you do better than that???
Are there others that are going to comfirm this or just you Alluvium???

Again will you post the video soon???

[BuckAu]

Flapjack I to would like to see the videos posted, I was not a tester but I can tell you first hand that, Alluviums settings have found more big gold than you would care to dream about.
FlySh** well that Is another story.
Regards BuckAu

[Huego]

Ultimate settings Can you do better than that???
Are there others that are going to comfirm this or just you Alluvium???

Again will you post the video soon???

Flapjack, perhaps you do not understand. Or do you think I or others do not undertsand?  As I read Alluvium's meaning, the detector's settings were each optimised for the ground conditions and coils used. These settings may vary from day to day & place to place where such videos were taken. Quoting setting numbers is of little value. A side-by-side comparison on same targets IS useful.

The integrity of the experienced team comprising these 10 testers is beyond question in my opinion (I have met some). Most have used ML products for many years, detected for a living for many years, found hundreds of oz in various states. Their professsional abilities is seen from their success. This speaks for itself. Many were even wanted to do tests by and for ML! BUT they are independent, not aligned or promoters for ML like JP appears to be! Neither are they denigrators of the 4500 or 5000.

Huego

[Flapjack]

As of right now I do not believe my questions have been answered!!
Doug told a lot of us on another forum that if we came to his forum he would have the "testers" tell us about the ML not detecting a 30oz. nugget at 2 feet in enhanced.
So far Alluvium has spoke up but is very vague about the whole thing.
A look at Alluviums settings on another part of the forum you will see that he has stated the the Deep seach mode with the Audio in Deep should not be used together??

"Do not use Deep setting here when Deep is used on the F/E Cap, as the Signal to Noise ratio is infringing on the faint responses.
With the 4000 you could use Deep / Deep, but on the 4500 it's noisy."

This is total B.S it makes no difference as this is only a search mode you can set it up how ever you want just like General.
This makes me wonder if he knows what he is doing.
That is why I have asked.
As for the other testers who knows??
At this point I still think it is B.S.
 A video?? Would be nice.

As for you Huego no need to respond to my posts your opinion holds no water for me.

[WM6]

A look at Alluviums settings on another part of the forum you will see that he has stated the the Deep seach mode with the Audio in Deep should not be used together??

"Do not use Deep setting here when Deep is used on the F/E Cap, as the Signal to Noise ratio is infringing on the faint responses.
With the 4000 you could use Deep / Deep, but on the 4500 it's noisy."

This is total B.S it makes no difference as this is only a search mode you can set it up how ever you want just like General.

Hi Flapjack,

as I understand Alluvium stated this from his own experience not from theory.

Do you repeat this Alluvium settings claim in field on the same terrain characteristic that you know it is BS?

Or you speak only from theory/manual?

[Huego]

As of right now I do not believe my questions have been answered!!  Doug told a lot of us on another forum that if we came to his forum he would have the "testers" tell us about the ML not detecting a 30oz. nugget at 2 feet in enhanced. So far Alluvium has spoke up but is very vague about the whole thing. A look at Alluviums settings on another part of the forum you will see that he has stated the the Deep seach mode with the Audio in Deep should not be used together??

"Do not use Deep setting here when Deep is used on the F/E Cap, as the Signal to Noise ratio is infringing on the faint responses. With the 4000 you could use Deep / Deep, but on the 4500 it's noisy."

This is total B.S it makes no difference as this is only a search mode you can set it up how ever you want just like General.  This makes me wonder if he knows what he is doing.  That is why I have asked.
As for the other testers who knows?? At this point I still think it is B.S.  A video?? Would be nice.

As for you Huego no need to respond to my posts your opinion holds no water for me.

My posts only offer my personal opinions as do others on the fringe of this subject Flapjack!
My posts are for the enlightenment of others who read this, not just for you.

What I do know is that Alluvium will respond and explain the nature of such testing in his time, he is probably busy at the moment but has provided some verbal reports only. I suspect he does not feel accountable to the skeptics, BS artists, denigrators and bottom dwellers. You have no credibility on this forum, whereas Alluvium and the test team have heaps of proven capability. WHO DO YOU THINK MATTERS MOST?

A 'right to know' does not apply here. Cries of "Prove it" and "BS" are intended to draw out and accelerate the release of test reports / videos. If you are such an expert on settings, WHY are you asking Alluvium for what he used? ARE YOU CHALLENGING or TRYING TO DISCREDIT the testing and test team? Hmmmm? Yes, you are! Why would you do that?

Now, if my opinion "holds no water" to you, why do you think yours should here?

Huego
Queda Esto Demostrado

[Alluvium]

HI Flapjack,

The settings I have posted for the 4500 elsewhere on the forum are not just from myself, they were a combination that were decided to be the ultimate settings by a number of trusted experianced operators.

These settings suit searching for deep large gold as we do, and you know, "It Works!"
One of those very experianced operators even works for M/Lab to this day, and is a field operator.

When he told me about this Deep / Deep being noisy, I tried it for myself and it sure was.
Don't you think we know Deep on the front end cap is a Search mode??

You idiot, we have our own settings there, not Factory Settings.

As for being so rude, I suggest you Pull Your Head In, it may get chopped off.

Alluvium

[Flapjack]

Come to think of it Alluvium I don't know what you know just like you don't know what I know.
That is why I have asked.
No need to go off half cocked and call me a idiot
If you don't want to give up the settings it is no big deal just say so,
Just thought maybe I might see something in you settings that was causeing the detector to miss the nugget.

As for Deep/Deep in my areas with my settings and four different 4500's never a problem. 

So Alluvium why is it that Deep/Deep is a problem?
I'm sure you asked the guy is a M/L field operator.I know if he was telling me this I would of asked why did you?

Chop away

Huego why would I care to know settings that would miss a 30oz nugget at two feet!!Other than not to use them!!!
As far as this discrediting crap you have been on to many ohter forums aruging
with others.

[Huego]

Flapjack, why would anyone care what you know or don’t know? Also I wonder if Alluvium cares what you know and don’t know – it’s your attitude to learning & understanding that’s at stake here! You called his information BS, so THAT makes you the idiot!

You might see something in Alluvium's “settings that was causing the detector to miss the (BIG) nugget.” I doubt it, more likely your ONLY intention was to try and criticise him & his settings, as you did.  Why not continue to use the settings that your mate JP suggests and leave Alluvium to find gold & post his reports his way. 

“As far as this discrediting crap you have been on to many other forums arguing with others.” (Flapjack)

Have I indeed?  Which forums & what discrediting was argued there? Perhaps you were part of the crap that was arguing there.

Huego
Queda Esto Demostrado

[Flapjack]

Get one thing straight Huego

I'm here to learn about detectors not fight about stuff.
I'm not here to cause trouble.
My B.S statement was out of line and so was my post I'm sorry I pissed Alluvim off.
So get over it!

Nuff said

[Doug]

Flapjack if you read Candy's patent on enhance you would know exactly why some bigger, deeper ,flattish nuggets lying flat  can be missed in SS/enhance/fine gold compared to normal timings!
But to help you this is my take (if I am talking techno B/S then I am sure others more knowledgeable than me I hope will correct  me!) If you use a signal processing method to remove the frequency susceptible signal components resulting from SPM ferrite's in the soil matrix  then you may also remove some or a lot of the Rx signal from  some nuggets. In the case of enhance this seems to be nuggets that have longer time constants (slower decay) ie flattish solid nuggets lying flat ,but when these nuggets are lying on their edge  they may have a much shorter TC which is what ML's in many timings are optimized for. The other factor is the sampling windows used. If you want to optimize detection of short TC nuggets then you must sample early and use narrow sampling windows so  that ALL of  the nugget Rx signal is in the window. If the early sampling window is too wide then the integrators will average the signal over the whole window with the result that the averaged signal will be much smaller  than with a  sampling window that contains ALL the nugget signal. Conversely for nuggets that have longer Tc you need much wider sampling windows so that you "take in" as much of the nugget signal as possible and  by averaging over this wider window you also help average out noise.
doug

[Flapjack]

Were can I see Candy's patent I will take a look.
I get some of the techno b/s
If I have any quiestions I will ask.
I think I understand what you are saying let me drink it in for a bit.

 Thanks, Flapjack