Deus 2 or Manticore

[ivconic]

The Vanquish was a very pleasant surprise, on the other hand.
Very affordable price, design and position of the box very good for the most difficult conditions, coil cable low to the stem, very protected.
And real Multi-IQ technology.
And then they made a new series of Vanquish... where they destroyed all those features that I praised!
How can you not love them? That's why I chose Deus 2! (or did Deus 2 choose me?)

[ivconic]

The reason why I often insist on such details is because I have been a metal detector repairman for years (a couple of decades now).
I saw severe consequences for the detector, due to the bad decisions of the constructor and designer.
The highest percentage of failures comes from the coil, through the cable to the connector.
In second place is the "self-initiative" of trying to replace the original power supply with an external battery pack.
Very rarely does the detector fail by itself, almost never. Except when it is 30 or more years old, then capacitors "leak" or resistors change value.
But by far the top number one is the reason I mentioned; wrong mechanical design, bad arrangement and position of coil cable and connector.
Does this not suit me as a repairman? That the detectors break down as much as possible, so that I have as much work as possible?
No.
Nowadays, this is totally irrelevant to me and it will rather be that it doesn't suit me.
Because today's "modern" detectors are increasingly difficult to service.
Failures are fatal, electronics are thin and SMD "invisible", parts are unknown, marked with meaningless labels, even if I decipher some components; it is impossible to find it in the local market.
All this makes servicing practically impossible. And in case it is possible; then the costs are such that the whole story is meaningless.
The idea is clear and visible, to instill the consumer mentality in people's minds to the end.
The idea is that today's metal detector only lasts a limited "programmed" time. And then you are forced to buy a new one.
The same "business" philosophy applies to all other branches of industry. There is no need for me to give examples.
In my collection I have, for example; Fisher CZ6, which was made... when?
It is still in mint condition today, works like new. Perfect behavior. Perfect condition.
And it will last so long that it will outlive me. And it is quite "easy" to service.
See all today's detectors, all brands, all models.
They look alike.
It's as if they all came out of the same "laboratory".
It is notably similar if not the same mechanical design.
Totally disastrous solutions, the worst possible!
XP made a very smart move with Deus 1, it satisfied all the different requirements.
And that good practice continues with Deus 2.
The choice is easy, right?

[ivconic]

Many will find enough arguments to contradict me.
But I'm not just a repairman and a "conspiracy theorist", I'm primarily, first of all; detectorist.
My primary urge is to go out into nature with a detector and search for artifacts.
I have a long experience in this, dating back to 1987.
What I could say as an undeniable truth (which will benefit younger generations) is that any solid metal detector will find a good find.
A good find is not found only by a detector, nor is a good find found only by an experienced detectorist.
A good find is a winning combination composed of the following ingredients:
1. Pure luck!
2. Experience!
3. Metal detector.

[ivconic]

ML proponents will say: "It's all for naught if the detector can't find 1/100 gram of native gold!"
When I hear that; I remember a poor prospector who went out into nature for couple of hours and found a nugget weighing 2kg with his $30 detector!
And then I watch National Geographic for hours, the "Australian gold diggers"... the poor people spend hours, days, weeks waving their overpriced detectors and huge coils, in unbearably hellish heat, risking health and life... to find 1 gram, maybe 10 grams in one day, if they're incredibly lucky!
...
Then here on the forum I see respected Paul torturing AI and designing future almighty machines!

[EL NINO]

Many will find enough arguments to contradict me.
But I'm not just a repairman and a "conspiracy theorist", I'm primarily, first of all; detectorist.
My primary urge is to go out into nature with a detector and search for artifacts.
I have a long experience in this, dating back to 1987.
What I could say as an undeniable truth (which will benefit younger generations) is that any solid metal detector will find a good find.
A good find is not found only by a detector, nor is a good find found only by an experienced detectorist.
A good find is a winning combination composed of the following ingredients:
1. Pure luck!
2. Experience!
3. Metal detector.

Iconic ..I completely agree with you...
1.Pure Luck.
2.maybe I should add Terrain/Experience..
3. Detector /choosing the right detector../coils..

[EL NINO]

ML proponents will say: "It's all for naught if the detector can't find 1/100 gram of native gold!"
When I hear that; I remember a poor prospector who went out into nature for couple of hours and found a nugget weighing 2kg with his $30 detector!
And then I watch National Geographic for hours, the "Australian gold diggers"... the poor people spend hours, days, weeks waving their overpriced detectors and huge coils, in unbearably hellish heat, risking health and life... to find 1 gram, maybe 10 grams in one day, if they're incredibly lucky!
...
Then here on the forum I see respected Paul torturing AI and designing future almighty machines!

Ivconic... you look at it from the perspective of a person who works in electronics.. every detector, even the best one.. after some time of detecting terrain, hits its technical limits.. how quickly it depends on the characteristics and difficulty of the detected terrain...

On heavily detected terrain, we need a detector... that will do something more.. in proper target detection, or in detection depth,,or in separation between iron..

In order for the designer to be able to do this... the designer needs to have strong knowledge of the physics of target detection ...

[ivconic]

Today's engineers do that job very well, there is no doubt about that.
The problem is in the "medium" - soil.
It is an insurmountable and unpredictable "variable".

[ivconic]

Yesterday I went to sites, Deus2 and Manticore.
We did very badly.
Both detectors are over reporting bad pieces of iron as "good targets"!?
I can't seem to get Deus2 to work reliably.
A colleague with his Manticore has the same problem!
We dug lot of trash!

[EL NINO]

Yesterday I went to sites, Deus2 and Manticore.
We did very badly.
Both detectors are over reporting bad pieces of iron as "good targets"!?
I can't seem to get Deus2 to work reliably.
A colleague with his Manticore has the same problem!
We dug lot of trash!

Hello Ivconic...in order for modern detectors to detect masked targets...and detect in mineralization...they must use higher frequencies, and they must also be set to the so-called "soft discrimination" of objects..this means that certain types of iron and iron objects will appear as non-ferrous targets...in a significantly larger amount than in detectors with "hard discrimination" of iron..
The use of high frequencies also helps to effectively detect deeper buried targets such as aluminum foil, so you end up digging up a larger amount of non-ferrous waste..

I have been doing real analysis of excavated targets for a long time..where in each detection with the detector used I compare the ratio of excavated iron and non-ferrous targets in relation to the so-called good targets../"hard targets" like coins, pieces of coins or pieces of lead, and lead shot /

Furthermore, I also compare the detector's reaction to various targets, as well as the ease of detection and identification of targets..on the audio side but also according to the ease of obtaining the correct VDI signal of the target..especially for small "fixed targets" such as pieces of coins that I can dig up,,,,or also lead shot,,-which I can then reliably eliminate with my VDI type detection..

For example, I will show detection with D2 on the Fast program, Disc 6.8..reactivity 3 ,silencer 0, frequencies max 40.. on terrain strongly overdetected by other detectors,, among others ORX and D1.. on various frequencies..

This old stone narrow road is very demanding on false response from old iron...but it is my testing ground for testing any detector..in terms of detector settings and its effectiveness ..

https://youtube.com/shorts/tasBlwYSq4U?feature=share D2 setting in Test field

https://youtube.com/shorts/D-V3RHPBziY?feature=share Iron falsing in terain the Test field

https://youtube.com/shorts/AqvcPzdbuRM?feature=share Nonferous target...

ratio 28 Iron targets to 4 non-iron targets..

[ivconic]

Good job, you did a good job.
I think MultiF (as well as Multi-IQ) technology is now slowly showing its flaws.
I don't think it's a flaw in the concept.
I think the signal analysis code is not well thought out and written good enough.
I don't think there is any need to make any changes to the hardware.
But it is necessary to make radical changes to the software.
I hope the very overbearing and autistic XP "experts" visit this forum and read this.
I have a message for them: guys, you made good hardware but wrote flawed software. I don't doubt your knowledge. But I think you were in too much of a rush to get the product to market.
DSP must be done better, more inventively.
Deus 1 suffered a similar fate too. It was practically unusable until f/w version v3.2 and then things started to improve.
I'm currently running v5.21 on Deus 1 and have no complaints.
Deus 2 as it stands now, as it is; is pretty mediocre on actual soils.
I don't know how it is outside the borders of Serbia, but in Serbia there are many Deus 2 owners and an unprecedented negative odium has been raised around the disappointed expectations.
Because Deus 2 doesn't beat Deus 1 right now on our soils.
So in my humble opinion; the developers in XP need to do their best and write a much better DSP.
You have noticed that I have been neutral and silent on these topics for a long time.
For the simple reason that I didn't have my own Deus 2 and my personal experiences.
Now I have it and I already have some field experience and therefore I give myself the right to take off the gloves and say what I honestly think.
But I believe in XP. I'm sure they will try and fix things.

[ivconic]

I will have to simplify the message, I don't believe they will understand it (if this message ever reaches them).
I will write as simple as possible, so that those brains will be able to understand.
Deus 1 with v5.21 finds much less iron and debris than Deus 2 with v3.1.
Deus 1 behaves safer and more stable.
Deus 2 is a more perfect machine. But it is clear that the code is flawed.

[ivconic]

As for Manticore, I wouldn't want to be beholden to that other party either.
I will write very short and simple: I will never pick up one of the ML Multi-IQ detectors again.
Vanquish 340 blew me away.
But all the other models disappointed me a lot.
These are ordinary "vacuum cleaners", they collect too much trash.

[EL NINO]

Ivconic... I ask you one thing....give the multi-frequency detectors a few more chances..in your detection..and you will see if some terrain doesn't suit them better...and you will still be able to compare it with your good single-frequency detectors..such a long-term review can be beneficial..and the situation can change with new software...

It can be in the style of gladiatorial games in the Colosseum,,where there can be only one winner. ... Ave Ivconic..!!!

[ivconic]

You're right, I need to give it time. Have a detector for ten days; it is not enough.
But I base my comments on the experiences of others as well. This time I came very late to Deus 2 and everyone else had it before me.
So I listen to what other people are saying as well. Maybe I came off too harshly... but that's enough twisting into sweet wafers.
Big bucks were paid for that equipment; it's our consumer right to expect quality for the money, right?
I don't want now in the 21st century, after 40 years spent with various detectors on various soils; to repeatedly collect tons of waste, iron junk and piles of foils.
Where is the progress?
These days I also take the Garrett GTI2500 to the fields. I work in AM mode while the cursor in the upper part of the LCD always shows "VDI" correctly and clearly.
I'm more happy with Garrett now than with Deus 2 and Manticore.
Where is the logic, where is the progress?
Those "great engineers" should lower their noses and chins a bit. The world was not created yesterday when they were born.
...
I have a lot of experience with AI.
This whole story reminds me if like they made these detectors with the help of AI!?
Mere theory - zero practice!
Such are the results on the fields.

[ivconic]

Right now Youtube is flooded with video praises from useful idiots. They test detectors the old wrong way. They bury the coin and then test it. They add a nail from the side. Etc.
And there are those who search in city parks. It is so far from the real conditions on the ancient grounds!
Here, here now; I send a public invitation to "geniuses" from XP and ML to visit me, to come to me, to take them to a couple of my fields. Let them see for themselves. Let them bring their machines.
There is no need for them to believe me or not, let them see for themselves.
My place, Sokobanja, is a tourist place, there are a lot of hotels and apartments. They can accommodate easily for a couple of days.
Prices are ridiculous affordable compared to "western world" prices. And New Year's Eve is approaching.
Then Sokobanja is full of tourists and many beautiful things happen. There is still no snow, the soil is dry and suitable for testing.
So such a small short trip will be a very nice experience for them + they will be able to see for themselves the very harsh reality surrounding their machines.
For God's sake, these are imperial grounds!
Constantine the Great was born and raised here!
Are there better soils than these for testing!
And above my house is the area where Scythians and Celts resided 2300-2500 years ago.
In our Serbian custom, we have a comical saying: "even the bravest have taken a "fully pants" here!"
Translated into our detector language: "here, even the best detectors were embarrassed to the end!"
Are you afraid, gentlemen?