QED Info Thread.

[gef12]

Gef12,

I am interested in your thoughts regarding the fact that the 17x11 picked up the little solid 0.3 test ball well ( albeit air test ) but not so well on the bigger targets in the ground ? :/

As I said in my original post today, maybe the QED just doesn't respond well to that sort of rough gnarly gold ?

Rick

Rick .. that is good going for a 17x11 on a smally .. For deeper targets you need to adjust your settings on the QED .. but it was not my point.
My point was the coil comparisons doing the tests .. and i did state it was IMHO ..but I should correct it to IMHTO :Y:

 

[mbasko]

i reckon his bias was too low for that coil in videio, should have been on 50 or above, my opinion only cheers

Opinions are like backsides, everyone has one, and mean nothing to me when they come from anonymous snipers. :N:
How about you show us how to run a QED with that coil on ???????

Rick

i wouldnt use that coil with that low a bias, next time ur in adelaide id be happy to show you how to use it properly with the 11 inch commander or 12 inch nf, no problems anyday, pm me when you wanna do it, can get someone good to film the whole thing if your happy

dasenator777 it would be good if you could meet up down in SA with Nenad (if he could or was willing to do it) & run through a series of similar tests to those Rick did with your expertise on the QED & Nenads on SDC/GPX/GPZ. I believe your QED even came with a 17"x11" Coiltek coil for similar coil size as Rick used to show how your settings could improve on his results?
Maybe that would put an end to the petty arguments & shit ragging of people who put up their own independent findings or opinions but I doubt it.

I've used 2 different booster arrangements (SP01 & B&Z) on the QED & the audio is still very low in comparison to other detectors. With headphones the benefit of a booster is negligible - not needed IMO & can serve to only lift all noise including the unwanted noises although the SP01 was able to be set up to eliminate some background noise & had no background "buzz" like the B&Z on the QED. A booster does improve it with a speaker but not to the same point of using one on other machines.
People are complaining that Rick has an audible threshold on the GPZ but not on the QED. IMO that is directly due to the low audio of the QED (even with booster) & also the fact the "threshold" on the QED operates differently to Minelab machines & isn't as pronounced any way. Any one experienced with both makes of machine will know this. The QED does have a threshold but it is very low & on any video I've ever seen on the QED is barely audible or not audible at all on the video sound. No trickery or smoke & mirrors by Rick there. It is what it is.

The 17"x11" NF is also not a large coil - more midsize range. Being elliptical it should be judged on it's smaller measurement of 11"! All the 17" provides is a larger footprint for more ground coverage!! Can you not set an 11" coil for small gold??? Maybe not because my Detech likes to sit on a bias of 52!! On a GPX the 17"x11" NF is a good all round coil for both small gold & deeper/larger bits. It should be able to be set on the QED to hunt smaller gold?? We keep getting told to use a lower bias for small gold but it seems this is not possible on mid sized, all rounder type coils??? With the sensitivity of the new Elite & Evo coils it would seem obsolete to use them on the QED if they cannot be biased for the smaller gold areas particularly if you use say a 14" Elite as your main coil - it has been seen many times on a GPX that these coils can & do pick up very small gold + larger deeper gold as well. Why would you not be able to bias a mid sized, sensitive coil for a small gold area while still enjoying better ground coverage??? You should be able to do that granted larger coils from 16" or so up would be best used for depth & set up as such.
Obviously running a neutral bias might be the answer but I've experienced coils that for a variety of reasons I.e. mode used, ground, threshold A etc. don't settle on 50!

 

[PhaseTech]

Thanks Rick for doing the test, I know these take away precious detecting time.

 

[dasenator777]

i reckon his bias was too low for that coil in videio, should have been on 50 or above, my opinion only cheers

Opinions are like backsides, everyone has one, and mean nothing to me when they come from anonymous snipers. :N:
How about you show us how to run a QED with that coil on ???????

Rick

i wouldnt use that coil with that low a bias, next time ur in adelaide id be happy to show you how to use it properly with the 11 inch commander or 12 inch nf, no problems anyday, pm me when you wanna do it, can get someone good to film the whole thing if your happy

dasenator777 it would be good if you could meet up down in SA with Nenad (if he could or was willing to do it) & run through a series of similar tests to those Rick did with your expertise on the QED & Nenads on SDC/GPX/GPZ. I believe your QED even came with a 17"x11" Coiltek coil for similar coil size as Rick used to show how your settings could improve on his results?
Maybe that would put an end to the petty arguments & shite ragging of people who put up their own independent findings or opinions but I doubt it.

I've used 2 different booster arrangements (SP01 & B&Z) on the QED & the audio is still very low in comparison to other detectors. With headphones the benefit of a booster is negligible - not needed IMO & can serve to only lift all noise including the unwanted noises although the SP01 was able to be set up to eliminate some background noise & had no background "buzz" like the B&Z on the QED. A booster does improve it with a speaker but not to the same point of using one on other machines.
People are complaining that Rick has an audible threshold on the GPZ but not on the QED. IMO that is directly due to the low audio of the QED (even with booster) & also the fact the "threshold" on the QED operates differently to Minelab machines & isn't as pronounced any way. Any one experienced with both makes of machine will know this. The QED does have a threshold but it is very low & on any video I've ever seen on the QED is barely audible or not audible at all on the video sound. No trickery or smoke & mirrors by Rick there. It is what it is.

The 17"x11" NF is also not a large coil - more midsize range. Being elliptical it should be judged on it's smaller measurement of 11"! All the 17" provides is a larger footprint for more ground coverage!! Can you not set an 11" coil for small gold??? Maybe not because my Detech likes to sit on a bias of 52!! On a GPX the 17"x11" NF is a good all round coil for both small gold & deeper/larger bits. It should be able to be set on the QED to hunt smaller gold?? We keep getting told to use a lower bias for small gold but it seems this is not possible on mid sized, all rounder type coils??? With the sensitivity of the new Elite & Evo coils it would seem obsolete to use them on the QED if they cannot be biased for the smaller gold areas particularly if you use say a 14" Elite as your main coil - it has been seen many times on a GPX that these coils can & do pick up very small gold + larger deeper gold as well. Why would you not be able to bias a mid sized, sensitive coil for a small gold area while still enjoying better ground coverage??? You should be able to do that granted larger coils from 16" or so up would be best used for depth & set up as such.
Obviously running a neutral bias might be the answer but I've experienced coils that for a variety of reasons I.e. mode used, ground, threshold A etc. don't settle on 50!

id be very happy to do any testing or filming, i use the nokia speaker, nice crisp and clear, only haedphones i found any good are the old rpg one with vol control on each ear....i followed alot of your posts before i bought one, atleast you not biased and have plenty brains, cheers buddy :Y: :Y: :Y:

 

[gef12]

Sent you PM Dasenator777
re battery box

Also mate have the Treasure Mate v3 speaker amp .. it works a treat on the QED .. fixed filtering ..
pm me if interested
vktek gef

 

[dasenator777]

Thanks Rick for doing the test, I know these take away precious detecting time.

thats why its very important to do it properly, or waist of precios time .... id meet up with you in mt crawford to do testing and filming not a problem at all :Y:

 

[dasenator777]

Sent you PM Dasenator777
re battery box

Also mate have the Treasure Mate v3 speaker amp .. it works a treat on the QED .. fixed filtering ..
pm me if interested
vktek gef

no probs gef, heading out to deliver wood load now will pm you this arvo cheers buddy

 

[Treadsoftly]

Thanks for the reply Rick.
So, how could the QED be improved?

 

[gef12]

i reckon his bias was too low for that coil in videio, should have been on 50 or above, my opinion only cheers

Opinions are like backsides, everyone has one, and mean nothing to me when they come from anonymous snipers. :N:
How about you show us how to run a QED with that coil on ???????

Rick

i wouldnt use that coil with that low a bias, next time ur in adelaide id be happy to show you how to use it properly with the 11 inch commander or 12 inch nf, no problems anyday, pm me when you wanna do it, can get someone good to film the whole thing if your happy

dasenator777 it would be good if you could meet up down in SA with Nenad (if he could or was willing to do it) & run through a series of similar tests to those Rick did with your expertise on the QED & Nenads on SDC/GPX/GPZ. I believe your QED even came with a 17"x11" Coiltek coil for similar coil size as Rick used to show how your settings could improve on his results?
Maybe that would put an end to the petty arguments & shite ragging of people who put up their own independent findings or opinions but I doubt it.

I've used 2 different booster arrangements (SP01 & B&Z) on the QED & the audio is still very low in comparison to other detectors. With headphones the benefit of a booster is negligible - not needed IMO & can serve to only lift all noise including the unwanted noises although the SP01 was able to be set up to eliminate some background noise & had no background "buzz" like the B&Z on the QED. A booster does improve it with a speaker but not to the same point of using one on other machines.
People are complaining that Rick has an audible threshold on the GPZ but not on the QED. IMO that is directly due to the low audio of the QED (even with booster) & also the fact the "threshold" on the QED operates differently to Minelab machines & isn't as pronounced any way. Any one experienced with both makes of machine will know this. The QED does have a threshold but it is very low & on any video I've ever seen on the QED is barely audible or not audible at all on the video sound. No trickery or smoke & mirrors by Rick there. It is what it is.

The 17"x11" NF is also not a large coil - more midsize range. Being elliptical it should be judged on it's smaller measurement of 11"! All the 17" provides is a larger footprint for more ground coverage!! Can you not set an 11" coil for small gold??? Maybe not because my Detech likes to sit on a bias of 52!! On a GPX the 17"x11" NF is a good all round coil for both small gold & deeper/larger bits. It should be able to be set on the QED to hunt smaller gold?? We keep getting told to use a lower bias for small gold but it seems this is not possible on mid sized, all rounder type coils??? With the sensitivity of the new Elite & Evo coils it would seem obsolete to use them on the QED if they cannot be biased for the smaller gold areas particularly if you use say a 14" Elite as your main coil - it has been seen many times on a GPX that these coils can & do pick up very small gold + larger deeper gold as well. Why would you not be able to bias a mid sized, sensitive coil for a small gold area while still enjoying better ground coverage??? You should be able to do that granted larger coils from 16" or so up would be best used for depth & set up as such.
Obviously running a neutral bias might be the answer but I've experienced coils that for a variety of reasons I.e. mode used, ground, threshold A etc. don't settle on 50!

I've used 2 different booster arrangements (SP01 & B&Z) on the QED & the audio is still very low in comparison to other detectors. With headphones the benefit of a booster is negligible - not needed IMO & can serve to only lift all noise including the unwanted noises although the SP01 was able to be set up to eliminate some background noise & had no background "buzz" like the B&Z on the QED. A booster does improve it with a speaker but not to the same point of using one on other machines.

I tend to disagree mbasko ... my Treasure Mate works quite well with the QED..

 

[mbasko]

The gist of my above post was more about explaining why I thought there is a very audible threshold on the GPZ & not much/nothing on the QED. Wasn't really trying to debunk the use of boosters on the QED although it may read like that to some I guess. I've also tried the Nokia MD-11 amplified speaker on the QED which again is ok but not to the audio level of other machines. The Nokia speakers biggest downfall is also the lack of a volume control. I used to use these on the Whites GMT & they worked very well on it.

Have owned & used 2 of your Treasuremate amps/speakers. They are great particularly being an all in one unit. The new set up with rechargeable battery would make it even better as would a replaceable lead - I damaged both mine thru my own fault of straining the lead. Did the same to my first B&Z set up. Wireless is the go :lol: although it could be mounted on the QED ok.

I've owned quite a few different types/brands of boosters/amps including some from China. The only direct comparison I've ever made though was between the Treasuremate & a Rooster Booster on GPX5000. They were much the same but in mine & a mates opinion the Rooster Booster had a bit more volume output in that comparison. While having never compared them directly I always considered the B&Z fairly close to the Rooster Booster.
As I said above the boosters I tried on the QED did improve the audio output level but not the same as you would expect on SDC/GPX/GPZ as the audio input from the QED is very low to start with. It can only be boosted or amplified so much by these types of units so unless you have substantially increased the audio output capabilities of the Treasuremate I'm guessing I would still be a little dissatisfied with the audio level but others may not be.
The headphones I've tried on the QED are Seinheisser HD-280's & RS-160's. Found the Seinheisser HD-280's worked well with the SP01 with being able to set it up to my liking. The filters on the SP01 definately worked better with these headphones in some settings over others. I've since sold the SP01 as I prefer wireless & I could not find a wireless system that the QED using the SP01 would work well with (don't start me on QED/wireless compatibility issues :N: ). These headphones also work fine just plugged directly into the QED without a booster but yes there is increased volume with one.
The best audio set up I've used on the QED to date are the Seinheisser wireless RS-160's that have their own built in volume controls. I tried the boosters with these but there was very little or no noticeable improvement. They are fine just by themselves & what I now exclusively use on the QED.
Maybe a video of your Treasuremate demonstrating the threshold audio level with & without on the same QED settings would help convince me to buy another unit

Edit: p.s. I should also add & haven't made it very clear in either post that my main objective in trying boosters on the QED was to lift the baseline threshold in order to pick up variations easier. Both boosters I tried did lift it a bit but not greatly - as said it's different to the Minelab threshold & very quiet to start with.
Both boosters did lift the obvious target signals as expected - no issue there. That's not the issue I have with the QED audio - its hearing those small breaks in the baseline threshold that is hard to amplify whereas on the Minelab machines because it's more pronounced to start with amplifies more readily which is what I believe is heard in Rick's video with the much louder GPZ threshold over very low/nothing from the QED. It's not some type of trick to discredit the QED that's just how the threshold is.

 

[Reg Wilson]

mbasko, there are a few cordless systems that work well with the QED. Like you I use the Sennheiser R160s but have used the TDKs and found them to be fine. There is no way you need a booster with either of these units. I also use the Garret cordless system in conjunction with the Bose noise cancelling earbuds, which are unbelievable. I normally favor noise cancelling earphones, having found that the Bauhn (Aldi) phones worked great with GPX and GPZ but were too soft for the QED. The NC phones that worked fine with the QED were the Jabra, but I'm not sure they are still available. Well worth getting, if you can. I was told that the Jabras are still being made under the name of Black Box, but not sure if that is so.

 

[mbasko]

Yeah thanks Reg I've been interested in that Garrett + Bose combo since you posted it up awhile ago just had other bill priorities so will hopefully get something going on it soon.
It's a pity that the headphone manufacturers didn't take to Kleer wireless technology more as the RS-160's work great - good constant transmission unlike most of the Bluetooth devices I've tried on the QED which seem to "cycle" transmission (for want of a better description) likely due to the low threshold audio? The Minelab Prosonic set up I tried doesn't fare any better. All the systems I tried have worked for me on other detectors which has been a pain on the QED but the Kleer technology RS-160's seem to be made for it.

 

[Reg Wilson]

mbasko, one area where Garret has it all over Minelab is their cordless system. No comparison.

 

[gef12]

The gist of my above post was more about explaining why I thought there is a very audible threshold on the GPZ & not much/nothing on the QED. Wasn't really trying to debunk the use of boosters on the QED although it may read like that to some I guess. I've also tried the Nokia MD-11 amplified speaker on the QED which again is ok but not to the audio level of other machines. The Nokia speakers biggest downfall is also the lack of a volume control. I used to use these on the Whites GMT & they worked very well on it.

Have owned & used 2 of your Treasuremate amps/speakers. They are great particularly being an all in one unit. The new set up with rechargeable battery would make it even better as would a replaceable lead - I damaged both mine thru my own fault of straining the lead. Did the same to my first B&Z set up. Wireless is the go :lol: although it could be mounted on the QED ok.

I've owned quite a few different types/brands of boosters/amps including some from China. The only direct comparison I've ever made though was between the Treasuremate & a Rooster Booster on GPX5000. They were much the same but in mine & a mates opinion the Rooster Booster had a bit more volume output in that comparison. While having never compared them directly I always considered the B&Z fairly close to the Rooster Booster.
As I said above the boosters I tried on the QED did improve the audio output level but not the same as you would expect on SDC/GPX/GPZ as the audio input from the QED is very low to start with. It can only be boosted or amplified so much by these types of units so unless you have substantially increased the audio output capabilities of the Treasuremate I'm guessing I would still be a little dissatisfied with the audio level but others may not be.
The headphones I've tried on the QED are Seinheisser HD-280's & RS-160's. Found the Seinheisser HD-280's worked well with the SP01 with being able to set it up to my liking. The filters on the SP01 definately worked better with these headphones in some settings over others. I've since sold the SP01 as I prefer wireless & I could not find a wireless system that the QED using the SP01 would work well with (don't start me on QED/wireless compatibility issues :N: ). These headphones also work fine just plugged directly into the QED without a booster but yes there is increased volume with one.
The best audio set up I've used on the QED to date are the Seinheisser wireless RS-160's that have their own built in volume controls. I tried the boosters with these but there was very little or no noticeable improvement. They are fine just by themselves & what I now exclusively use on the QED.
Maybe a video of your Treasuremate demonstrating the threshold audio level with & without on the same QED settings would help convince me to buy another unit

Edit: p.s. I should also add & haven't made it very clear in either post that my main objective in trying boosters on the QED was to lift the baseline threshold in order to pick up variations easier. Both boosters I tried did lift it a bit but not greatly - as said it's different to the Minelab threshold & very quiet to start with.
Both boosters did lift the obvious target signals as expected - no issue there. That's not the issue I have with the QED audio - its hearing those small breaks in the baseline threshold that is hard to amplify whereas on the Minelab machines because it's more pronounced to start with amplifies more readily which is what I believe is heard in Rick's video with the much louder GPZ threshold over very low/nothing from the QED. It's not some type of trick to discredit the QED that's just how the threshold is.

Mbasko,
The ol Roosta boosta .. there is a blast from the past .. had to fix one or two .. heard it had a few problems from customers and on forums.. My Nugget Booster is similar to it with the gain maxed out to cater for persons with hearing problems. I have many a happy customer. Cannot max gain on the TM thou .. have to consider battery consumption.. but is still loud enough. The TMv3 and NBv3 both have fixed filtering. Yes will do vid one day .. have more priority matters at hand at the moment.. like my new coil ..
Re the swap out cable for the TM.. I do customize these ..but have a one base design.
You can fit so much in a small enclosure.
Happy hunting all

 

[dasenator777]

hey gef just sent you pm cheers buddy

 

[dasenator777]

i reckon his bias was too low for that coil in videio, should have been on 50 or above, my opinion only cheers

Opinions are like backsides, everyone has one, and mean nothing to me when they come from anonymous snipers. :N:
How about you show us how to run a QED with that coil on ???????

Rick

i wouldnt use that coil with that low a bias, next time ur in adelaide id be happy to show you how to use it properly with the 11 inch commander or 12 inch nf, no problems anyday, pm me when you wanna do it, can get someone good to film the whole thing if your happy

Like to see that.. not having a go at you Araratgold. But somebody with a better understanding of the settings on the qed would make it interesting. I now own both machines and there's no way I would compare the qed with the 7000.. 7000 would win 9 days out of 10. I have done about 80 hours with the qed about 20 hours with the 7000 and no Pro with either one but enjoy using both. that's this assholes 2c worth

and this asshxxe seconds it too lol :Y:

 

[dasenator777]

A QUOTE FROM ANOTHER USER ON ANOTHER FORUM...NOW HE KNOWS HOW TO GET THE BEST OUT OF QED, IVE TRIED IT NOW AND BUGS CONFIRMS ALSO....Re: QED Information
Post Jarrodt6 on Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:40 pm

Been a while and I'm still swinging my QED, having young kids doesn't allow me to get out much. I'm up to about 10 pieces for 4 grams, not a huge amount but happy enough since I only get out once or twice a month.
One major improvement was the sennhieser rs160 headphones, the extra volume and not ripping out the cord when you're digging is night and day better, worth every cent.
I still fiddle with the settings every time I go out but that's more out of interest than anything else. At the moment if the ground allows I'm running the volume really high at around 70-80 and you almost get a solid threshold and hear every little noise, you have to keep the bias neutral to do this but my tests have proved I get better depth this way than a low bias/low mode approach.
I did recently run into the first ground that seemed too noisy for mine, shallow surfacing with a lot of clay. I've done other areas like this fine but this place had me getting false signals every few meters, I'm putting it down to the 11" elite being super sensitive and I'm looking at getting a bigger coil like the 14" because I'm not really after sub .1g that the 11" can find and it should run smoother.

In my opinion looking on other forums about the QED too much attention is given to the modes and the bias, I pretty much run mine in mode 8 and use the other settings to get the sensitivity. People say they get better tests in mode 1 than in mode 8etc, but mode 8 runs much quieter so now you can up your gain and up your volume like you can't in mode 1. Of course if you leave mode 8 with gain at 1 it will lose sensitivity.
Right now I run mode 8, gain 4-5, bias neutral and volume 70-80. If it's a bit noisy I bring the volume down first to as low as 30, then the gain. If it's runs really quiet I up the gain to 6, if it can handle more I go down to mode 7, then 6 etc but I never run my gain under 3, I see too many running low modes with gain under 3 and I don't think this is good, get the gain up higher in a higher mode, I get less ground noise this way.

Recently while having a break we set up a couple of tests with a .2 and 1 gram while stopping for lunch. The other detectors were a gpx 4500 with older 11" coiltek mono and a gpx4000 with 14" elite. I was happy that I could match both on the 1 gram and they both agreed I had the edge on the .2 over the 4500, no doubt the elite coil vs terracotta helped.
The difference we noticed was that the QED's signal is much easier to hear but it drops off quickly as it reaches its max depth while the minelabs gently faded into the slight woo-hoo.

I still didn't feel I had the best detector but it was certainly close, and for half the price, much less weight, no cables and the satisfaction I put it all together myself how I wanted I was happy.
The only time it fell behind was with my super sensitive 11" on the clay surfacing it struggled with false targets while the older 4000 with the 14" went along well and found a couple of nice gram+ bits with less fuss. In other ground i have found small gold that this 4000 missed.

:Y: :Y: :Y:

 

[jahan]

Re: QED Information dated on Tue Oct 03, 2017

Does that still apply to the QED PL2.

 

[Reg Wilson]

Jahan the latest QED is slightly different in the ground balance readings, the mode has been extended and auto ground balance added. The basics remain pretty much the same. Same, same, but different.

 

[dasenator777]

Re: QED Information dated on Tue Oct 03, 2017

Does that still apply to the QED PL2.

it should mines first gen, number 011 made, but been all updated to current specs and agb, works fine buddy :Y: