Tuning Down A SMF Digital Machine On The Thames

Would Tuning Down A SMF Digital Machine On The Thames Outperform My Analog Machines?

The very simple answer to this question is NO, in some areas of the river where the iron isn't heavy they might display similar performance. 

The above question is something that I've been asked many times and it's also a subject that I've mentioned a lot in my videos and a few times in previous blogs. Those that are new to my videos might not be aware that I use to hunt the Thames with both my Equinox 800 and Legend. Initially this was because I didn't have to worry about the modules getting wet and covered in mud. Collectively I hunted for many hours with both machines.

I've stated in the blog I wrote about the Legend that it operates great on areas where the iron isn't so brutal. The one point I'd like to make, when I was using my Legend, it was on a section of the river that I'd never hunted so finds were in an abundance. The same can be said for my Equinox when it came to hunting on the river, it worked great where the iron was more sparse. I enjoyed using both these machines and this is a point I can't stress enough. Digital or analog I love all metal detectors, but I favour certain types over the other.

I Really Like Pitch Tones

I've explained time and time again that I use specific detectors for specific tasks, I don't use one machine for everything. Why Do I Only Use Nexus Machines In My Fields? this is very simple to answer, because when hunting pasture I want to go as deep as possible and this is where Nexus is untouchable. My Tesoro's as with all my other detectors aren't what I call deep seeking so it's totally pointless taking them on to a terrain where I want to go deep. All of my analog detectors excel on landscapes like the Thames foreshore when it comes to shallow target hunting in iron. These types of terrain don't require depth, I personally think Tesoro's have some of the best discrimination circuits ever made so they are the perfect choice in this situation. Especially if you tune them down, I can get away with doing this because most non-ferrous targets aren't deeper than say 3 ' inches. Once again, this is where machines like Tesoro excel, it's using the right tool for the job.

Nexus Standard MP V3+ Performs Fantastic On The Thames

I do use my Nexus V2 and V3+ on the river but they have to be tuned right down, even with the Threshold on zero it still detects way too deep for what I require on that specific terrain. So going back to the title of this blog, I've explained in the past that those who use SMF digital machines will come to the assumption that if you tune down say the Manticore, Deus 2 and Equinox etc then they will outperform my analog machines on the river. What Do I Mean By Tuning Down? Simple, I bump the recovery speed right up and lower the sensitivity down, this, in theory will then replicate the performance of the Tesoro's and the other machines I use because 'in theory' they are now setup the same way.

Is The Above Assumption Correct?  

From extensive first hand experience the answer is NO it isn't, people don't seem to understand or pay attention when I explain that a microprocessor isn't as fast as an analog circuit. Analog gives an instantaneous response as to what's under the coil, be it ferrous, non-ferrous or a mix of both. You basically get instant feedback and there's an organic set of nuances that microprocessors can't replicate and never will be able to.When this has been mentioned in the past some have jumped in and said that the delay can't be heard by the human ear. Me personally, I can feel the delay in a digital target response. But putting that point aside, the delay has nothing to do with if we can hear it. It's to do with the FACT that microprocessors need time to think, so the delay that can't be heard by the human ear is still there. This is one reason why Nexus can unmask so well, the analog circuit doesn't need time to process what's going on. 

More Resilient Than Analog On The River 

It has nothing to do with "a preset iron bias setting" on a digital machine that the manufacture can lower if they so desire. This statement that's been thrown around is just trying to justify why Nexus and other analog machines can unmask in situations 'on the Thames' where the digital gear fails. What About Assumptions Created From Test Gardens? For me test gardens really aren't the be all and end all in regards to proving the performance of how a machine will perform in the wild. If anything they give a warped view of detector performance. Now don't get me wrong, if you've buried targets that have been in the ground around 10 years then you can learn the audio/modulation of what a suspected deep target sounds like.

BUT

The point to take into consideration here is when you swing over a target you've buried, you know it's there and you know when the coil is over it. It doesn't work like this in the field, is that same coin that's been in the ground for decades going to give you the same reading as the one you've had buried, what about if that coin/target is sitting at a strange orientation just on the edge of detection? This is debatable, test garden demonstrations distort real world hunting and performance. Obviously the "Test Garden Wankers" out there will disagree with what I'm saying but I work from actual hunting situations as opposed to the synthetic engineered situations that people construct in their test gardens. A machine that can see a coin next to iron stuck on wood and placed on top of concrete shows nothing about detector performance for me, it just shows the guy flogging these tests as relevant is an idiot. 

I DIGRESS

Both the Legend and Equinox need a high discrimination to control them on the brutal areas of the Thames that I hunt. The Legend overloads a lot on the large iron and the Equinox struggles when you have loads of large lumpy iron mixed with the flat stuff. If you run the discrimination low on either machine you're going to struggle because both are basically overloading all the time. One thing I will say though is, in my opinion the Legend has better discrimination than the Equinox and handles the big stuff a little better. But neither machine can identify large iron by using the perimeter of the coil, digital machines just don't have that nuance. 

To conclude because the digital detectors are relatively versatile you can configure them to perform in most situations but the very simple fact I'm explaining here is simple. "Tuning down" a digital machine doesn't make it outperform the analog detectors that I use for this specific style of hunting. Like I've said before, the reason I say this is because I've tried it and persevered with it for quite a long time before I came to a conclusion. Once again, my views are based on first hand experience not from posts and videos online of benign test garden bullshit. In regards to taking the same detectors I use on the river into the fields, I don't that .. Why Is This? because they're not deeper enough but like I've explained a thousands times before. I use different machines for different tasks and I always pick the specific ones that excel in the style of hunting I'm doing on the day.

Another point I've made many times before, one machine can't excel in all areas, Nexus is pretty bloody close but it comes at a price, it's not user friendly. The digital machines are more versatile than most of the detectors I swing but versatility in most areas doesn't translate into top performance in most areas. So to go back to the start of this blog. Would Tuning Down A SMF Digital Machine On The Thames Outperform My Analog Machines? I'm sorry but no it wouldn't. 

A Great Performer Is Certain Situations