Deus 2 or Manticore

[EL NINO]

Ivconic I believe you have excellent ancient civilization terrains for testing detectors... As a tester of some detectors... I prefer this type of terrain... because there the real technical and detection capabilities of new detectors are demonstrated, as well as the optimal setting of the detector for such terrain or detection situation...
And in such situations, detectors should also be tested and compared in practical detection..

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO PROPERLY SET UP A MULTIFREQUENCY DETECTOR SO THAT IT DOES APPROXIMATELY WHAT WE WANT FROM IT,,
Finding such a setting requires a certain type of testing in the field and a good analysis of detected and excavated targets.. and finding a compromise in good target detection and at the same time in good discrimination of unsolicited targets..

A good test field system with masked targets between iron... which will tell you how the detector can lose its ability detection target according to the settings,, but also how effectively the detector discrimination still works by eliminating false signals from iron..Clear results of such testing must be confirmed in field detection.

On my Deus2 test field in the Fast program.. multifrequency max 40khz:
on silencer 0... does not see 1 target out of 35 possible targets in iron..
on silencer 2 ... does not see 9 targets out of 35 possible targets in iron..
on silencer 7.. does not see 17 targets out of 35 possible in iron..

The question is, is the silencer setting 0,, the best option in practical detection..? Probably not...

I see the possibilities of modern multifrequency..., and as I know what it can do. especially on heavy mineralized or conductive terrain... on the other hand, I also see certain side effects.. which can bring in detection.. like digging more iron and waste if the program setting or type of multifrequency is not optimized for this type of detection..

I also do not condemn the use of one frequencies and range and I prefer to use single frequency detection in combination with multi-frequency detection.

[EL NINO]

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?

Sometimes I laugh out loud... when someone goes to do tests for a few hours in a "strongly" overdetected place with a "New detector" and pulls out 20-30 coins of various sizes..

[ivconic]

Yes, that's how it was 13 years ago with Deus 1.
I found coins even "where there are none".
But today the situation is much worse and more difficult.
Coins do not sprout, because no one plants them!
Hard times!

[ivconic]

[reddirtfisher]

Both are over rated. You don't always have to get what is "popular" or you don't really need what most people use on YouTube. It all depends on the skill of the user. I would challenge both of these detectors to a test using any one of my "entry level" machines. The results would be shocking to say the least. I recommend getting one that is comfortable, lightweight, and one you enjoy using.

[EL NINO]

Both are over rated. You don't always have to get what is "popular" or you don't really need what most people use on YouTube. It all depends on the skill of the user. I would challenge both of these detectors to a test using any one of my "entry level" machines. The results would be shocking to say the least. I recommend getting one that is comfortable, lightweight, and one you enjoy using.

What basic detectors do you use? I'm just curious...

[EL NINO]

Pretty high..
And what about the results? ....or observations from the detection?

[ivconic]

Both are over rated. You don't always have to get what is "popular" or you don't really need what most people use on YouTube. It all depends on the skill of the user. I would challenge both of these detectors to a test using any one of my "entry level" machines. The results would be shocking to say the least. I recommend getting one that is comfortable, lightweight, and one you enjoy using.

Over rated or not; I am collecting them, for fun and because I can.

[ivconic]

Pretty high..
And what about the results? ....or observations from the detection?

The good news is that Deus 2 just keeps getting better and better. In other words, my handling with it is getting better and better.
I noticed one thing. And this is very important for as many people as possible to read, especially XP Deus 2 owners.
Settings in the room and "performance" in the room are one thing, but in nature is quite another.
Everything that I preliminarily set up in the room and made in a couple of programs; proved to be incredibly bad on the field!
Then, on that terrain from the photos, I dedicated an hour to setting it up on real soil and on real targets, both wanted and unwanted... and Deus 2 shined!
Only then did it show all it's quality! I'm overjoyed!
On that hill I found with it 17 very deep coins. I'm sure Deus 1 wouldn't be able to locate even a third of that.

[EL NINO]

Ivconic ...That's a very good result.... in my opinion, multifrequency..does what it's supposed to do...correctly..

[EL NINO]

The good news is that Deus 2 just keeps getting better and better. In other words, my handling with it is getting better and better.
I noticed one thing. And this is very important for as many people as possible to read, especially XP Deus 2 owners.
Settings in the room and "performance" in the room are one thing, but in nature is quite another.
Everything that I preliminarily set up in the room and made in a couple of programs; proved to be incredibly bad on the field!
Then, on that terrain from the photos, I dedicated an hour to setting it up on real soil and on real targets, both wanted and unwanted... and Deus 2 shined!
Only then did it show all it's quality! I'm overjoyed!
On that hill I found with it 17 very deep coins. I'm sure Deus 1 wouldn't be able to locate even a third of that.

In my opinion, room settings/laboratory tests/..would only work in clean sand, or in non-mineralized terrain...where the influence of mineralization and terrain conductivity would be eliminated,,which is not our case...

But laboratory tests are also important -mainly for assessing the theoretically maximum technical possibilities of the detector..which we can achieve with a given program and detector settings..and which can be practically achieved -in a similarly ideal terrain...

This also shows how in Real and old terrain...we have to adjust the laboratory settings to set the detector that best adapts to the given detected terrain...

A certain help in finding the right setting for such terrain,,can be.. .for example, a reasonably large box with a sample of the terrain on which we are detecting..
I quite often do the so-called reverse simulation of a detection situation that I experienced...in a given terrain ..which I will convert into a synthetic test...

[ivconic]

This can be more or less accurate, depending on the complexity of the detector as well as the conditions in the room.
Single frequency machines will be easier to arrange in a room or on a test site. But Multi frequency machines... more difficult.

[Arthur-Canada]

I don't know if anybody has made this comment or observation already on this thread but it does warrant mentioning. I see folks doing lots of masking tests on a flat ground with a coin surrounded by iron. It's all well and good if in fact all three, four or five of these targets are all on the same plane. Not likely at all to happen in the real world. The real true test of a metal detector's ability is to put those targets arranged in a way that they are also separated vertically as well as horizontally. Most people would be mind boggled to see how poor every detector does once you raise an iron target slightly above the good target that you are hoping to find. Iron masking is far worse in vertical separation than it is in horizontal. Very rarely can a metal detector see through iron to find the coin below. I know one metal detector that used to be able to do that and that was the old Compass Yukon that ran on 100 kilohertz, but had such dismal depth capabilities that it should barely be mentioned in the same sentence with modern metal detectors.

[ivconic]

Very good observation and accurate!



As for Deus 2; there are some slight differences compared to the Deus 1, which are only noticeable after some time of use.
One of the biggest problems I have with some sites is the large amount of bottle caps.
(Small silver coins are often below, a few centimeters)
With the Deus 1 I partially solved that problem by raising the Silencer to 4.
The Deus 1 then successfully discriminated about 60% of the bottle caps.
Deus 2, to my great pleasant surprise; it solves this problem in a much higher percentage, I won't say 100% because I still have a small number of visits to the sites.
However, there is always a "catch 22"!
So far, it has turned out that the deepest program is "mono", and it is one of the three programs that do not have this option (B.Caps).
So for now I cover the fields with 2 custom programs: "mono" in general and customized MFM with B.Caps option, when it is needed.
Conclusion; MFM is more efficient in properly classifying metals.

[EL NINO]

I don't know if anybody has made this comment or observation already on this thread but it does warrant mentioning. I see folks doing lots of masking tests on a flat ground with a coin surrounded by iron. It's all well and good if in fact all three, four or five of these targets are all on the same plane. Not likely at all to happen in the real world. The real true test of a metal detector's ability is to put those targets arranged in a way that they are also separated vertically as well as horizontally. Most people would be mind boggled to see how poor every detector does once you raise an iron target slightly above the good target that you are hoping to find. Iron masking is far worse in vertical separation than it is in horizontal. Very rarely can a metal detector see through iron to find the coin below. I know one metal detector that used to be able to do that and that was the old Compass Yukon that ran on 100 kilohertz, but had such dismal depth capabilities that it should barely be mentioned in the same sentence with modern metal detectors.

Tests with coins and nails in a plane... is a 2D flat separation test..for example, such a test is a separation test of Mr. Monte...and not every detector can handle such a test...yes, there are situations in detection where the results of such a test are transformed into practical detection...

The test with coins and nails that are at different depths is a 3D separation test, and some detectors can handle it really well...there are many detection situations where the results of such a test are transformed into practical detection of targets in this type of terrain...

A good detector must handle both types of separation well...,,, clearly the size of the coil also plays an important role...