an alternative

[ivconic]

I don't know why it wasn't all combined into one video. There is also a sequel:

In which Rowan mentions two new (DFX) functions: "Normalization" and "Correlation".
I had DFX, I know what that means.
Most importantly; I remember very well the changes that happen when those two functions are active.
Listening to Rowan explain it somehow immediately before my eyes pops the image of Nokta Simplex and Nokta Legend.
This applies more to the Simplex and less to the Legend. But even with Legend, this problem is visible to an experienced eye.
Despite the fact that both Simplex and Legend are very well made machines
(despite all my previous criticisms and not so good experiences on real sites with them) it seems to me that both are lacking and falling hard
on this exactly, what Rowan explains! "Normalization" at first place.
Walking the site, detecting numerous tagets with Simplex; I got exactly that impression. Because VDI numbers were all over the place at most targets.
Later on, the same site, walking with Legend i also noticed that problem, this time not so frequent.
Nokta did a good job. Up to the point of more detailed signal processing.
If I am right, then this is very good news for Nokta/Makro !!!
Because Simplex and Legend are upgradeable. And the whole job to be done is in the code.
Let the people from Nokta/Makro watch Rowan's video and understand what their machines are missing.
If they see this suggestion of mine and listen to it, both Simplex and Legend will become much better machines.
But in that case it is their obligation to name the next even better version of the Legend model as "Ivconic the Legend" !!!

[ivconic]

... but Deus 2 should be better than Fisher CZ 3D , in a parallel test . When we want to know if one detector is better than another- in the field, in real search- two searchers, with different detector models and each checks his friend's signals before digging...

I have Deus 1, I don't have Deus II nor CZ3D (unfortunately). But I would put all my money on CZ3D in case of such testing.

[Riss]

I have 3 test sites for detectors, the oldest one is 25 years old. 22 years ago I didn't have a portable oscilloscope but by turning the discrimination potentiometer I knew where the vector was- lies exactly between the soil effect vector and the ceramic vector . As the ceramics are about 5 degrees clockwise from the ferrites (ceramics lag behind ferrites in phase) , then the vector in question lags behind the ferrites in phase by about 4 degrees . As if the ground effect just above the signal is rotated clockwise about 1 degree . if the detector is set to a neutral ground effect away from the signal , just above the signal, the ground defect is a slight plus . This pulls up the discriminator almost like a ferrite, and we have no chance of hearing the signal if the discriminator is on .