Vortex

[NorthwestrnWIMD]

So the answer is really yes but not due to actual seeing the target but because Target 1 was detected and displayed for approx 2 seconds. Then Target 2 was detected and displayed for 2 seconds. Target 1 will disappear first because it was detected 1st followed by Target 2. Not sure that the Vortex had this function like the CTX. It would seem that there would be a limit as to how many targets could be displayed and which could or might have priority.

Yes. That's why my response was depending on how far the targets are apart. And like Diga stated if they are close you just get an average of the 2 IDs.

 

[Cherry Picker]

When I heard of the Vortex having new technology, I read a lot of the posts on the main Vortex Facebook page. Anyway, I was surprised at the amount of people on that page that thought the Vortex could see and ID targets under the coil independently, instead of getting a combined response like every other detector does.

There was a lot of confusion about the Vortex from the start and still continues. Most of that confusion is brought on by VHS(Vortex Hate Syndrome) and misleading posts. The new technology is the ability to upGRADE a lower cost detector and not just upDATE.

The same was misled about the multiple targets. Independently was never added to the posts until now.

 

[Cherry Picker]

I was surprised at the amount of people on that page that thought the Vortex could see and ID targets under the coil independently, instead of getting a combined response like every other detector does.

Not like every other detector. Below is a shot of the Manticore going over a US clad dime and zinc penny less than 1 millimeter apart vertically. Photo taken just as the coil cleared the targets. You can clearly see 2 different nonferrous targets at the same time in the proper ID locations.

 

[Diga]

The new technology is the ability to upGRADE a lower cost detector and not just upDATE.

The "new technology" was advertised as MD-MF and it's unique way of analyzing targets. As it turned out, MD-MF is just Garrett's flavour of Multi-IQ which is the same technology used in most modern SMF detectors. In other words, it was only new technology for Garrett. It's current technology for Minelab, Nokta, Quest, and XP.

The same was misled about the multiple targets. Independently was never added to the posts until now.

Thing is, as I described, many people erroneously think that "independently" and "at the same time" are the same thing. The term independently had to be added to the discussion to clear up that misconception.

 

[Cherry Picker]

The "new technology" was advertised as MD-MF and it's unique way of analyzing targets. As it turned out, MD-MF is just Garrett's flavour of Multi-IQ which is the same technology used in most modern SMF detectors. In other words, it was only new technology for Garrett. It's current technology for Minelab, Nokta, Quest, and XP.



Thing is, as I described, many people erroneously think that "independently" and "at the same time" are the same thing. The term independently had to be added to the discussion to clear up that misconception.

As far as the MD-MF, we know how marketing people love to use their own concepts.

Independently was not needed to clear things up, unless you spoke of yourself. Again I say, and what difference does sequential or independent have on the results? Nothing. from what I see in the picture. It is clearly showing 2 different identifiable targets at the same time.

 

[Diga]

Regarding CP's post #23.

Yes, the targets are on the screen at the same time, but the detector didn't see the targets at the same time. If it did see the targets at the same time, there would only be one ID and one ID location.

Also, the VDI can only show one ID number, so the picture doesn't show the other ID number that would have appeared. Put another way, in that exact scenario, any detector with a fast enough recovery speed and a slow sweep, would have showed two ID numbers.

 

[The Lama]

I've only got 2 hunts on my vortex and pretty much only used ms and my brain has a problem looking at screens but i forced myself a few times and on ms it only shows one line but still will show multiple blocks and i could see how a screen guy would find it really useful,also hunting wide open i dug no nails, tent stakes and only one bottle cap which i think is stunning for a multi

 

[Cherry Picker]

Regarding CP's post #23.

Yes, the targets are on the screen at the same time, but the detector didn't see the targets at the same time. If it did see the targets at the same time, there would only be one ID and one ID location.

Also, the VDI can only show one ID number, so the picture doesn't show the other ID number that would have appeared. Put another way, in that exact scenario, any detector with a fast enough recovery speed and a slow sweep, would have showed two ID numbers.

Only 1 VDI number, but the locations clearly show the dime & penny in the proper locations. knowing where a dime or penny hits on the nonferrous line would be pretty informative I would think. I don't think I would need a VDI number to know both targets were in the location of coins.

 

[Diga]

CP,

Did you take that Manticore picture? If so, can you post a video instead?

Also, since the 2D screen is showing distinct and different dots on the nonferrous line, then the other ID number should have appeared before the ID number of 80 shown in the picture. If so, then the leading edge must have hit on one of the coins first (sweep angle?) and then the trailing edge of the coil hit the other coin and produced the ID number of 80.

 

[Carl-NC]

Wow, you guys are arguing over microsemantics. Stack a nickel on top of a quarter, that will be a case of both target signals arriving "at the same time." I don't know of a single detector that can ID them separately. But as soon as you start moving the coins apart, depending on the recovery speed detectors can tell them apart and give you separate responses. The audio responses are never "at the same time" but rather sequentially or possibly blended. But the screen responses can be effectively "at the same time" in that both responses are reported together, even though the targets were not detected "at the same time." The White's XLT was the first to do this with SignaGraph. Effectively, this is showing more than one target under the coil "at the same time."

To answer the OP's question, I haven't tested a Vortex so I have no idea. But it's been done before, so it's not impossible.

 

[Cherry Picker]

CP,

Did you take that Manticore picture? If so, can you post a video instead?

Also, since the 2D screen is showing distinct and different dots on the nonferrous line, then the other ID number should have appeared before the ID number of 80 shown in the picture. If so, then the leading edge must have hit on one of the coins first (sweep angle?) and then the trailing edge of the coil hit the other coin and produced the ID number of 80.

No I didn't. The picture came from a discussion about the ability of a detector, Mantiocore/CTX, being able to display more than 1 target.

Coil was 3” above the targets. One audio response and one target ID.

Since I didn't write the code I could only speculate why it is showing the dime VDI. Perhaps it is showing the target with the strongest signal. Perhaps the code is written to display the VDI of the highest VDI. There could be a number of reasons. Instead of drifting off to change the subject, we just admit yes, that the Vortex can display multiple targets under the coil like the CTX.

 

[daddyflea]

When I heard of the Vortex having new technology, I read a lot of the posts on the main Vortex Facebook page. Anyway, I was surprised at the amount of people on that page that thought the Vortex could see and ID targets under the coil independently, instead of getting a combined response like every other detector does.

One thing that did not seem correct was a test where a nickle hit at 53 by itself. Another test with a nail raised the TID to a 63. I hit a spill a few days ago. There was a quarter, a dime, and a nickle. On my D2 the TID was around 84 which should have been zinc penny, but the point was the TID was brought down by the nickle. I could not understand the up average.

 

[Cherry Picker]

If I remember right, the first videos of the Vortex showed multiple targets being displayed on the Tree-Tier at the same time. They are on YouTube

 

[Diga]

Explaining how the leading edge, trailing edge, and angle of approach in that two coin scenario, can give the illusion of detecting targets at the same time, is in no way changing the subject. And no, I'm not going to admit to something that is false.

See all the ferrous and nonferrous unmasking videos using the Manticore, Vortex or whatever detector? All show one combined ID of the targets. They certainly don't show the proper ID numbers for each target.

 

[Diga]

One thing that did not seem correct was a test where a nickle hit at 53 by itself. Another test with a nail raised the TID to a 63.

I saw that as well and mentioned it. The nickel should have had a much lower ID, and certainly not the 63 which is a higher ID than the nickel! Someone mentioned it in the video's comments too. This was Garretts reply:

"This nail orientation with a thick square nail is the toughest challenge. With the nail/coin positions in this demo, the target blending pushes the combined number up (Ex: 62). MD-MF technology is analyzing iron on two different levels (X-axis) and non-ferrous on a completely different axis".

I don't know if I'm not understanding that answer, or if Garrett gave an answer that didn't actually answer the question lol.

 

[Cherry Picker]

With my CTX I didn't need a VDI number to tell me a good chance for a coin. I could look at the location on the conductive line and have a very good idea if it was a quarter/dime/penny/etc. Just as well as if I looked at the VDI.

The OP's question was "Will a Vortex actually show more than one target under the coil like a ctx?" The simple answer from what I've seen on videos is yes.

 

[Carl-NC]

See all the ferrous and nonferrous unmasking videos using the Manticore, Vortex or whatever detector? All show one combined ID of the targets. They certainly don't show the proper ID numbers for each target.

I don't know of any detector that displays multiple VDI numbers at the same time. But quite a few can show the responses of 2 adjacent targets on a spectral graph at the same time. The VDI could then be a blended response, or the stronger of the 2 targets, depending on the preference of the manufacturer.

 

[sube]

One thing that did not seem correct was a test where a nickle hit at 53 by itself. Another test with a nail raised the TID to a 63. I hit a spill a few days ago. There was a quarter, a dime, and a nickle. On my D2 the TID was around 84 which should have been zinc penny, but the point was the TID was brought down by the nickle. I could not understand the up average.

The CTX would also up average a nickel when with a nail minelab thing frequency thing ? sube

 

[Diga]

I don't know of any detector that displays multiple VDI numbers at the same time. But quite a few can show the responses of 2 adjacent targets on a spectral graph at the same time. The VDI could then be a blended response, or the stronger of the 2 targets, depending on the preference of the manufacturer.

A blended OR stronger signal. That makes sense. But, simultaneously with the correct ID block for each? For example, if a nickel and dime are distorting the field at the same time, can I get a proper ID blocks on the dime AND the nickel?

 

[Diga]

The CTX would also up average a nickel when with a nail minelab thing frequency thing ? sube

Maybe Garrett's answer is saying their algorithm adds up the nonferrous and ferrous IDs, and that's why the nickel is giving an ID even higher than a nickel???