Minelab Equinox 800 Frequency

[Danno]

Hi,
Does the Equinox 800 truly run in all the advertised frequencies or is this just another marketing trick like FBS?

If you pick say 20khz to run as a single frequency, is it truly 20khz or just a harmonic of a un specified frequency?

Also I am guessing there is now way to know which frequency it is using when reporting a find in multi?

Thanks

[Skippy]

The single-freq operating modes are actually what they say, quite accurately.
For the in-depth technical stuff, these two threads are what you need:

http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...ineLab-Machine
http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...inox-Challenge

[Danno]

I did read somewhere that it only runs on 2 frequencies at a time, it picks the 2 most appropriate frequencies for the program you are running?
If that's the case then it's not much different than a DFX in multi frequency?
Can anybody confirm this please?

[Carl-NC]

n park & relic modes it runs 7.8kHz & 39kHz. In beach mode it runs 7.8kHz and kHz.

[ivconic]

n park & relic modes it runs 7.8kHz & 39kHz. In beach mode it runs 7.8kHz and kHz.

39/7.8=5

probably nothing...

[Skippy]

Quote:"I did read somewhere ....."

In print, or online ? If it's online, can you please provide a link, so we can assess how valid it is. As you must realise, the internet is absolutely awash with ill-informed, fraudulent, speculative, biased, non-scientific hearsay about what detector xyz does or doesn't do.

How ML process the signals is all down to the machine's embedded software, so it would be very difficult to determine what they process, how, what decisions are made re: target/not. etc.

[Danno]

n park & relic modes it runs 7.8kHz & 39kHz. In beach mode it runs 7.8kHz and kHz.

Didnt think 7.8khz was an option?
whats the other in beach as you haven’t put one?

[Danno]

Quote:"I did read somewhere ....."

In print, or online ? If it's online, can you please provide a link, so we can assess how valid it is. As you must realise, the internet is absolutely awash with ill-informed, fraudulent, speculative, biased, non-scientific hearsay about what detector xyz does or doesn't do.

How ML process the signals is all down to the machine's embedded software, so it would be very difficult to determine what they process, how, what decisions are made re: target/not. etc.

https://www.detectorprospector.com/f...-in-each-mode/

Post by cipher

[Skippy]

Cipher's posts seem to fit into the 'speculation' category, he's not basing his opinions on the facts, despite there being a link to another detectorprospector thread, where the frequencies actually used are presented:
https://www.detectorprospector.com/f...spectrum-test/

The most useful post in the original thread is this one by Dubious:
"Unless someone goes to the trouble to reverse engineer the hardware and software--and explains it all--we'll never know the details. But it shouldn't matter at all in terms of using the Nox effectively."

And regarding this:"I didn't think 7.8kHz was an option?"
You obviously haven't read the two threads on here that I linked to. 7.8kHz is NOT a single-frequency option, it IS one of the Multi-IQ frequencies.

To summarise: Park/Field/Gold : Multi-IQ = 7.8k, 18.2k, 39kHz
Beach multi-IQ :7.8k, 13k, 18.2k, 39kHz

[Carl-NC]

To summarise: Park/Field/Gold : Multi-IQ = 7.8k, 18.2k, 39kHz
Beach multi-IQ :7.8k, 13k, 18.2k, 39kHz

This is what I see:

Park & Field: 7.8k + 39k
Beach: 7.8k + 18.2k
Gold: 40k + 5k (the 5k appears to be a useless amount, probably just to say it is "multifrequency")

[Skippy]

That's curious, and seems to conflict with others observations, I must go and take another look at Chiv's scope traces and spectrum analysis.

I was pondering how you might work out if only two frequencies were processed, when three were transmitted.
If you deliberately created 'interference' at one of the freqs, and it had no discernable effect on performance, then it may be true to say that it's ignoring that particular freq in that operating mode. No guarantees, but it seems a viable experiment.

As the Nox seems capable of generating any reasonable arbitrary waveform, and processing said frequencies in a variety of ways, it's not unlikely that future software updates may result in new frequencies / ground-elimination strategies etc. And you wouldn't necessarily know about it, unless it was obviously advertised -- "New Meteorite 1,2 modes!" etc.

[Carl-NC]

Looking on a spectrum analyzer will show a lot of harmonic spurs that are just byproducts. You can see the see the same thing with DFX, V3, and BBS/FBS. I prefer to focus on the TX current waveform to see what makes sense.

In multifrequency, a 3:1 ratio barely gives you enough spread for target info, though it is sufficient for salt compensation (as is done in the CZ design). A 5:1 ratio is better. I would not expect the Eq to process additional intermediate frequencies when those would provide no additional useful information (as is with the V3's 7.5k). So my analysis is based on what I see in the waveform, what makes sense in processing, and what I expect from Minelab.

[ivconic]

... A 5:1 ratio is better... and what I expect from Minelab.

Precisely.

[Mark-VA]

I just so happen to work for a pc board manufacturer and was wondering.
If the company I work for might happen to have a tester I could use to test my detectors?
What would be the easiest tester to use?

[ivconic]