Metal Detectors in the future - A prediction thread

[Deft Tones]

It seems to me that in the future single frequency output machines will have to go by the wayside. I see a future where any machine that transmits and recieves one frequency only, even the selectable machines, they will become nearly obsolete and dirt cheap by our standards today. I don't know how long this will take but I'm thinking 15 to 25 years, maybe less.

Anyone see a future for these current type of metal detectors other than the entry market?

I was imagining starting out 30-40 years ago and imagining then what would the future (today) might hold for us. Are any of the old veterans surprised where things have ended up today? Have you been impressed?

Hmmmmm....

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[cudamark]

Today's machines are SO much better than when I started (1970). They improved by leaps and bounds until the 90's when the tech kinda maxed out a bit. Still, there are small steps being made that have improved the hobby. Ergonomics, stability, water resistance, and adjustable features have made detecting more enjoyable in more places.

 

[SD51]

In the 70's, the digging tool was a screwdriver. Didn't get much depth but there sure was a ton of silver out there. If you see a picture of a detector from the 70's, you'll see that the shaft that connected directly to the coil was all metal, not some other non-conductive material like what we have today. That's an indication of how shallow the magnetic field emanating from the coil actually was.

 

[Loco-Digger]

I believe all top end VLF detectors from every manufacturer will mimic the XP Deus and allow for detecting in more than one frequency, more will be waterproof and some weatherproof. All will have wireless transmitters for wireless headphones. This is from a guy who has been detecting for 3 years.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Today's machines are SO much better than when I started (1970). They improved by leaps and bounds until the 90's when the tech kinda maxed out a bit. ....

Haha, you remember that too ? I started in about 1976 (Jr. high school). And it seemed that all the way till the early '90s, if you had a machine that was A MERE FEW YEARS OLD, you had a dinosaur. Your friends who upgraded to the "latest greatest" would spank you. But yeah, those leaps and bounds slowed way down starting in the 1990s. Today a machine that's 10 or 15 yr. old tech. is still perfectly competitive.

 

[Deft Tones]

So there had been a explosion of advancement over the span of approx. 25 years and now we're in a 25 year drought, yet still advancing but only incrementally.

And most everyone (who's in the market) seems happy to see new models that do nothing different fundamentally. Happily some accept reconfigured, repackaged, repainted....and it's ******ed real progress IMO.

I can see XP design and ergonomics copied, or imitated, but I just dont see anyone copying battery in the coil(without advancement in power storage), and especially single frequency transmit and receive... it's a huge time waster that is grossly inefficient. To hunt an area in "x" frequency, switch to "y" frequency and hunt the area again, repeat for all the selectable single frequencies..... grossly inefficient.

I see the future as a Millennial might, "I only want to hunt an area once and desire to hit it with everything I got and done" Push all frequencies at once and analyze all frequencies at once.

Perhaps we need advancement in processing and storage. Then put it together in a way that analyzes targets in real time by sound wave characteristics and do a comparison to known good signatures and spit out a probability percentage.

 

[Deft Tones]

Ha! R e t a r d e d is censored.

 

[vesa]

This is my kind of speculation so I will participate.

Aerial and underwater drones with coils connected to a controller/tablet that allows you to set search parameters. For example you select an area in a field and drone with a large coil that is almost ground level maps the interesting signals in the search area and the data is saved for further analysis. Increasingly drones have obstacle avoidance and sensors these days so I wouldn't be surprised to see them used in a forest area with a lot of trees too. (yeah this is out there and isn't likely to happen soon..)

Of course the traditional machine won't be going anywhere and will still be the main machine. Small lightweight, folds into a small space and is waterproof, has the wireless connections and multiple frequencies + can feed more complex readouts to a connected device. I'm guessing the big advances might be software related.

 

[Deft Tones]

Drones or droids, something other than human muscle will be doing the basic location work in the future.

Do we get all available information from the signals today? Not by a long shot.
Better software with detailed feedback is a good start.

Ability to capture a signal sound wave form for analysis in the field and compared against a remote database in real time would be a larger leap.

 

[Goldfleks]

I'm guessing the big advances might be software related.

You can read my posts in the "Where are the new machines" thread for my opinion on this. But I greatly agree that the software analysis of what I'm doing in the field is hugely lacking, simply because I can't connect my detector to my PC/Phone/Tablet. The head unit on a detector doesn't need huge processing power, it just needs to be able to transfer the signal information it's receiving to my computer, via my phone's 4g signal. So all it needs is a bluetooth connection to my phone from my detector.

Then all sorts of apps and programs could be designed by enthusiasts to analyze the data. I'm sure there is quite a few quality programmers who detect in there spare time.

 

[Goldfleks]

Drones or droids, something other than human muscle will be doing the basic location work in the future.

Do we get all available information from the signals today? Not by a long shot.
Better software with detailed feedback is a good start.

Ability to capture a signal sound wave form for analysis in the field and compared against a remote database in real time would be a larger leap.

Glad I'm not the only one who see's the benefit of crowd sourced information on signals, as well as the results of what's been dug.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Glad I'm not the only one who see's the benefit of crowd sourced information on signals, as well as the results of what's been dug.

..... Ability to capture a signal sound wave form for analysis in the field and compared against a remote database in real time would be a larger leap.

Deft Tones and Goldfleks, this notion was already addressed in the other thread. And with all due respect, it will not do any good . Even if/when such a data bank is computerized and processed. Ie.: the marvelous machines we have now DO provide all sorts of signal information. Amazing Explorer & CTX type graphs, or like the XLT-graphs that have analyzed the signals, Right ? Then it just seems that if the resulting target (eg.: gold ring, piece of foil, tab, coin, etc...) could be like-wise fed into the data (by "crowd sourcing" and so forth), then .... presto, you could be able to eventually figure out which signals are good versus which signals are junk. Right ?

But this was addressed in the prior post. It fails to take into account that you can take a good target or a bad target (eg.: a certain gold ring and a certain wad of aluminum) and create THE EXACT SAME SIGNAL. Given various depths, angles of tilt, size of foil wad, size of gold ring, etc....

Believe me, this was studied AD NAUSEUM back when TID's were coming out in the 1980s and '90s. Especially when the then-awesome XLT came out. For the first time it was no longer just an up-down axis of numerical TID readouts. It was now on a bar graph, with various peaks, smears, and so forth. So many users back them mused the same thing you guys are musing:

They could plainly see (in air tests) that various gold rings they sampled did indeed have different characteristics that various aluminum items they were air-testing. So the theory was, that even though aluminum and gold couldn't be differentiated by the earlier (1980s) TID's, yet now, with this added info, somehow the differences could be learned. Here we are, 25+ yrs. later, and I can assure you it can't be done. Not even with computers storing and categorizing a million crowd-surfed signals.

To the extent that each gold ring "sounds and reads different" from each aluminum item you test, well SO TOO does each piece of aluminum you test, and each gold ring you test SOUND DIFFERENT from each other too. It's never ending. And no amount of computing power is going to change that.

 

[Goldfleks]

I'm not going to disagree with you Tom. But some amazing things happen when sample sizes get into the billions, compared to even what the designers test in their labs. Or guys waving aluminum balls next to gold rings in their garages.

And I can totally dig a drone detector. Quad-Coptor that grids and collects data on every target in an area and you can go dig the premium targets while your drone maps out the next 100'x100' plot of land.

 

[Deft Tones]

Tom guys in the 80's.... those computers sucked for graphics. Totally lack resolution.

I can tell far more concerning an undug target with my spectragraph when set from a default resolution of 7 to resolution 1. Seems like a way forward to me.

I can tell far more about targets when analyzing through a laptop with a higher resolution display than I ever could on my little detector display....and the size of the display is not the problem.

Seeing what is hidden in plain sight requires higher resolution. I plainly see it waving foil/aluminum/gold in my low -tech basement lab. Same TID/VDI - different sound wave characteristics. What gives? My imagination? Computers don't have selective memory bias.

If it were not evident in my primitive 2017 testing I'd shut up about it and uninstall the software.

80's early 90's graphics were primative compared to 2017. My spectragraph, as nice as it is, has no better resolution than many desktops running win95.

And nobody is advocating for 100% accuracy (although that would be an excellent goal) but advocating for utilizing tools we have right now!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Tom guys in the 80's.... those computers sucked for graphics. Totally lack resolution.

80's early 90's graphics were primative compared to 2017. ......

And nobody is advocating for 100% accuracy ....

deft-tones and goldfleks, good conversation topic.

I am totally game for someone , some day, to come along and show it can be done. At present, whenever someone claims it can be done, all you have to do, to end the conversation is: Invite the person out to the nearest blighted park and say "show me". And lo & behold, the claims go silent. It turns out to be random chance guessing, or old fashioned notching.

But sure, if someone can ever harvest modern computing power, to show a distinct difference, the world will beat a path to their door

 

[cudamark]

This is my kind of speculation so I will participate.

Aerial and underwater drones with coils connected to a controller/tablet that allows you to set search parameters. For example you select an area in a field and drone with a large coil that is almost ground level maps the interesting signals in the search area and the data is saved for further analysis. Increasingly drones have obstacle avoidance and sensors these days so I wouldn't be surprised to see them used in a forest area with a lot of trees too. (yeah this is out there and isn't likely to happen soon..)

So, you expect millennials to detect and map an area and then delay gratification until they can come back later to recover the likely targets? Even us Boomers have a problem with that!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Aerial and underwater drones with coils connected to a controller/tablet that allows you to set search parameters.....

It's all so simple. If it wasn't for the lazy engineers and greedy corporate owners who don't want to invest. Tsk tsk.

And I also propose free pony rides to all the kids. And personal assistants to accompany us, to dig up the targets for us + carry our gear. I mean .... sheesk, it only makes perfect sense. Ok, someone get busy, and make it snappy.

 

[H-2 CHARLIE]

https://youtu.be/NRw7IUIJdlY

---

Minelab Gold Monster 1000. Due out real soon

 

[Tom_in_CA]

https://youtu.be/NRw7IUIJdlY

---

Minelab Gold Monster 1000. Due out real soon

that may be of interest to nugget hunter prospectors, but not coin/relic guys.

 

[jadocs]

https://youtu.be/NRw7IUIJdlY

---

Minelab Gold Monster 1000. Due out real soon

Isn't that just a high frequency VLF machine? 45 kHz if I remember correctly. What capability gap does it close as compared to other HF VLF detectors operating at or above 45 kHz?