Tweet
Originally posted by pito
View Post
Later I started making Pulse Star 2 which is the best PI I have made so far in its category.
In both cases, you should pay attention to what it literally says: "which I made".
So they are the best of those that "I made". And not from all that exist or from all that others have made.
So; I speak for myself. And I'm talking about what I managed to do.
It would not make sense for me to speak in general terms and to generalize things.
Certainly there are much better PI detectors and certainly much better work by others.
I hope that statement is clear now? Or need further clarification?
...
Proof?
For something that will cost $20-30, you should not ask for a proof.
You sit down and make it yourself and create your own impression about it.
Proof can be requested for something that requires more serious investment and effort, more invested time and work.
For example "My AGD analog detector work" by Auto-Mation-Assist is a very interesting project.
But it is very complex, it requires serious construction skills, good knowledge of the issues, but also a decent amount of money for everything needed for construction.
In that case, I asked for a "proof", not really a real proof, but just a short video where I would see the basic features of the detector.
Auto-Mation-Assist gave me the impression of a very serious expert in that field, I have no doubt that everything he wrote is correct, I am almost sure that everything is so.
And it would be shameful to ask him for any "proof". If it was understood that way, then I'm sorry, it was not my intention to doubt his claims in the slightest.
No, I just wanted to see that detector in action, if only for a few seconds, with the simplest demonstration.
I'm a detector fan, I "fall in love" with a detector sometimes based on just a few seconds of a video.
Vice versa; sometimes a few seconds of video demos immediately dissuade me from any further interest in that detector.
A matter of taste. And tastes are not discussed.
Unfortunately Auto-Mation-Assist didn't seem to see it that way and wasn't prepared to make a shorter video, so I lost all further interest.
The same is the case with what Moodz does on another topic. It all seems very interesting and I would like to see more details about it.
But a shorter video would say a lot more.
Unfortunately Moodz is a typical Aussie prankster who will push these things endlessly and will not provide such a video.
He will rather post x000 more posts with graphs, oscillograms, formulas and claims... but a simple 20 second video he won't do.
Again, I have no reason to doubt what Moodz writes and claims. The math is clear, his words are clear and he is a man with pre-established credibility.
So there is no "doubt" at all in my requests to add a video to the attached idea. Because video is a powerful medium and shows much more than words.
We are not all the same, someone is an analytical mathematician, a few simulations are enough for him to understand everything.
I am not like that. I'm a bit stupid. I visualize things when I think about them. To me, the video means and speaks much more.
And I draw conclusions based on my 37 years of experience.
There is little in this world on the subject of metal detectors - that I have not seen before.
So that experience helps me analyze and understand what I see on the recorded video.
And of course, in the end, I could always be wrong.
The video can be recorded with a tendency to show something that is not realistic. Youtube is full of those.
But in a good spirit and with a positive attitude, I always gladly watch every video and later draw my own conclusions.
There, Pito, I hope I explained something to you.
If you want to get an impression of this detector yourself; all you need is to shell out a trivially small amount of money and build that detector in a couple of hours.
I'm sure you'll make it.
Comment