To a good trained ear 50 tones using EQX can have advantages.
Folks may find this thread interesting.
http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,69178,172959#msg-172959
There is another thread I believe talks about advantages of using 50 tones.
I’ll see if I can find it.
Here it is.
Basically if you use 2 tones or 5 tones you are basically hamstringing the detector to what it could provide audio wise on some detecting scenarios.
http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,172596,172774#msg-172774
PS
Mr Dankowski was in on EQX engineering before release. Actually it was he who was responsible for its delay in releasing. Think it had to do with iron bias. Something he discovered to increase the detectors capability somewhat.
He has alluded to this in the last.
What I am saying he is very familiar with the platform.
He is restricted though to what he can say.
So his comments have been limited some what.
The EQX is talking when in 50 tones. There is a reason to what you hear tone wise. Meaning coil is passing over scenario and the fast Nox is examining and giving user feedback.
Coin on edge experiment will show folks.
Try a Deus on a coin on edge even using full tones.
Not the same as the Nox.
No warble.
Here is a test I just did.
Using EQX 800 stock coil.
Comparing 5 tone s to 50 tones using multi freq.
Using 50 tones I get a clue of mixed conductivity of the penny and cut piece of pie pan.
Using 5 tones I get no tonal intelligence to tell me possibly 2 targets with mixed conductivity exists.
In modern trash better be using 50 tones.
Now if I slow coil sweep to snail pace 5 tones “at times” give clue of mixed conductivity.
So using 5 tones one really can’t set a tone break to answer all mixed conductivity detected scenarios to alert user. Using 50 tones the detector has better chance of reporting. Granted some averaging is happening ID wise still yet tone behavior (the music) can expose.
Moral of the story.
Give the Nox as many baskets as possible to put things.
It can do.
Just listen and you may be rewarded.
Folks may find this thread interesting.
http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,69178,172959#msg-172959
There is another thread I believe talks about advantages of using 50 tones.
I’ll see if I can find it.
Here it is.
Basically if you use 2 tones or 5 tones you are basically hamstringing the detector to what it could provide audio wise on some detecting scenarios.
http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,172596,172774#msg-172774
PS
Mr Dankowski was in on EQX engineering before release. Actually it was he who was responsible for its delay in releasing. Think it had to do with iron bias. Something he discovered to increase the detectors capability somewhat.
He has alluded to this in the last.
What I am saying he is very familiar with the platform.
He is restricted though to what he can say.
So his comments have been limited some what.
The EQX is talking when in 50 tones. There is a reason to what you hear tone wise. Meaning coil is passing over scenario and the fast Nox is examining and giving user feedback.
Coin on edge experiment will show folks.
Try a Deus on a coin on edge even using full tones.
Not the same as the Nox.
No warble.
Here is a test I just did.
Using EQX 800 stock coil.
Comparing 5 tone s to 50 tones using multi freq.
Using 50 tones I get a clue of mixed conductivity of the penny and cut piece of pie pan.
Using 5 tones I get no tonal intelligence to tell me possibly 2 targets with mixed conductivity exists.
In modern trash better be using 50 tones.
Now if I slow coil sweep to snail pace 5 tones “at times” give clue of mixed conductivity.
So using 5 tones one really can’t set a tone break to answer all mixed conductivity detected scenarios to alert user. Using 50 tones the detector has better chance of reporting. Granted some averaging is happening ID wise still yet tone behavior (the music) can expose.
Moral of the story.
Give the Nox as many baskets as possible to put things.
It can do.
Just listen and you may be rewarded.
Attachments
Last edited: