The Nox doesn't do the snap shot, it has open gate audio, so it blends between targets.
So this would be the same as being in long or smooth as on the CTX
The Nox doesn't do the snap shot, it has open gate audio, so it blends between targets.
Imagine how jumpy the ID's would be if the Equinox had 100 ID's numbers, like many machines, instead of only 50.
That's probably why they cut the number of ID's in half. To make it "seem" more stable.
And, if the ID's don't matter to you, why not just use a beep-and-dig?
I think this vid debunks that theory https://youtu.be/ejv4uLv1hLs
At 30 seconds in he's using a Garrett AT Pro on a silver Mercury dime and it's a steady tone ringing in at 88-94 consistently with no deviation.
Then at the 1-minute mark, he uses the Equinox 600 and it's bleeping and blooping all over the place with a target ID that fluctuates wildly between 29 and -5. I wouldn't have even dug that target. That sounded like a rusty bottle cap.
The guy who did the video said that the Equinox had a better tone and that the AT Pro was "way off," yet the target ID never fluctuated past 88-94.
How is the Nox better?!
That is what a 9" deep silver mercury dime, copper penny or clad dime sounds like (slightly varying multiple high tones with a different tone for each numerical ID number) in 50 tones. Like he said, the Equinox was also picking up some iron contamination near that target. If Calabash had been using 5 tones or less on the Equinox it would have been a solid repeating single high tone just like the AT Pro which identified that first target very well in my opinion.
Some people should probably stick to 2 or 5 tones in the beginning since 50 tones, especially in a trash target rich environment may just be too much information to wade through. Since you are used to the Garrett 3 tone audio, 5 tones at the most, might be a good place to start.
Jeff
It's basically a beep and dig.
So are you saying if 2 or 5 tones had been selected the NOX VDI would have also been more stable? And if iron trash contributed to the jumpy NOX signal why didn't it impact the ATP signal?
It just seems odd to make a video claiming to show the NOX IDs better than the ATP and yet when the NOX didn't ID better it was because it picked up nearby trash that didn't impact the ATP.
There is so much misinformation out there, it's disorienting. It's hard to separate the subjectivity and contradictions from some of the statements I hear and read.
Let's go back to the Calabash video. Link here: https://youtu.be/ejv4uLv1hLs
We've already discussed the first target in that video.
Now let's turn our attention to the last target, starting at the 4:20 mark.
The target is an 1853 $1 gold coin. It's comprised of 90% gold and weighs 1.67 grams. It's buried 8-9" deep.
The AT Pro reads the coin with a high tone in the high 80's and 90's, suggesting it's silver. To me, that's impressive at that depth. It means that the AT Pro had a good read on it as a conductive metal, and everyone would have dug that.
The Equinox on the other hand, read it with a low VDI that fluctuated between 8-13. That to me is a weak tone with a lot of variance. In a trashy area, nearly everyone except the most hardcore "dig everything" guys would have passed on it. That reading was iffy, like a pulltab, or small piece of aluminum.
Here's where the subjectivity comes in. Calabash thinks that the high tone is bad because he believes that the Garrett will "up average" pull tabs into the 90's as well, based on this one isolated experiment, without giving any evidence to support that claim. I wasn't able to follow that logic.
Calabash then says that the gold coin is a "low-to-mid" conductor, and thus the Equinox was more accurate in its assessment. I disagree. A gold coin like that is more of a "mid-to-high" conductor due to its purity, the equivalent of between 22K and 24K. Not the typical "low-to-mid" 14K ring of less than 60% purity. Remember that the Equinox ID'd it into the single digits.
To add more confusion to this discussion, forum member Numil recently dug a very pure 22K 7 gram ring with his Equinox that sounded off in the high tones, into the 30's. Like silver. Link: https://metaldetectingforum.com/showthread.php?t=280445
So who are we to believe here on which machine was better at ID'ing coins?
I totally agree with you regarding Cala"bash" who's been bashing Garrett at every turn. I can't take him seriously for even a second.I wouldn’t put any stock In calabash videos.I watched one where the deus up averaged Deep nickels and he said he’d sooner have a machine upaverage than to down average and call it iron..I agree with that,but then he turns around and says the opposite when if it discredits the at pro...He’s a joke in my opinion.
I totally agree with you regarding Cala"bash" who's been bashing Garrett at every turn. I can't take him seriously for even a second.
I just don't get it. It would be much more interesting to show positive things about the detector he does like than trying to prove his detector is better than some other detector. I hope no one gets the idea he is providing unbiased metal detector comparisons.
At 30 seconds in he's using a Garrett AT Pro on a silver Mercury dime and it's a steady tone ringing in at 88-94 consistently with no deviation...…..never fluctuated past 88-94...………..