- Joined
- Mar 23, 2018
- Messages
- 69
- Reaction score
- 29
why leave up the main culprits posts, your kidding, please ban me or remove me or what ever you do here, way to one sided, must be a ml/codan site. thankyou kindly :|
QED Info Thread.
- Thread starter Davent
- Start date
Help Support Prospecting Australia:
Chill out everyone or this thread will be gone! We'd much prefer to keep it here though.
As a point of interest.
We want to keep this thread going as a mark of respect for the Developer of the QED and
also to promote the machine for every ones interest.
We, The Moderators are highly aware of the slagging match's going on behind the scenes.
.
Howard, You are more than welcome to come in and add your comments and help any one in
the use of your machine.
I myself personally am looking for a machine to fill the gap between an SDC and GPX4500. I have
a wide arsenal of Nugget Finder coils and some Generic, OEM ones as well.
And I am very closely looking at a QED.
As you know, I seen you at The Bash last year and was quite impressed with the machine.
So, The invite is there. :Y: :Y:
We want to keep this thread going as a mark of respect for the Developer of the QED and
also to promote the machine for every ones interest.
We, The Moderators are highly aware of the slagging match's going on behind the scenes.
.
Howard, You are more than welcome to come in and add your comments and help any one in
the use of your machine.
I myself personally am looking for a machine to fill the gap between an SDC and GPX4500. I have
a wide arsenal of Nugget Finder coils and some Generic, OEM ones as well.
And I am very closely looking at a QED.
As you know, I seen you at The Bash last year and was quite impressed with the machine.
So, The invite is there. :Y: :Y:
Araratgold
Rick
Unfortunately, Howard will not leave the safety of Doug's forum, the end result being that most of the QED info is hidden from the general public, which is a shame.
Rick
Rick
Araratgold
Rick
Someone on the half gram forum stated this :
" As I recall I could hear the nuggets, although very faint, in the threshold background before he lifted the GAIN from 1 up to 5.
Also from what I am reading about THS-A or volume as some call it, then if he had raised it above his 60 setting then maybe that may have lifted the nugget response as well as raising the GAIN to 5. "
This is what I can say about that :
At one stage during the testing I did lift the THS-A to 75 ( not on the vid ), but it seemed to make no difference at all, so I settled on 60 for the vid.
You are right when you say there was a faint response with the buried nuggets, but they wouldn't " break through " and " yell out " for want of a better description, until the gain was lifted significantly. However, the small 0.3 gram test ball of gold was a strong signal, albeit air testing ! :/
I liken the response on the bigger targets to running " Bogenes " settings of zero threshold on a GPX. It seems to clip the response somewhat on deeper targets, but the little shallow targets still jump out.
I'm still leaning towards the "type" of buried nuggets as the culprit for the poor response rather than the coil or the settings. :/
Rick
" As I recall I could hear the nuggets, although very faint, in the threshold background before he lifted the GAIN from 1 up to 5.
Also from what I am reading about THS-A or volume as some call it, then if he had raised it above his 60 setting then maybe that may have lifted the nugget response as well as raising the GAIN to 5. "
This is what I can say about that :
At one stage during the testing I did lift the THS-A to 75 ( not on the vid ), but it seemed to make no difference at all, so I settled on 60 for the vid.
You are right when you say there was a faint response with the buried nuggets, but they wouldn't " break through " and " yell out " for want of a better description, until the gain was lifted significantly. However, the small 0.3 gram test ball of gold was a strong signal, albeit air testing ! :/
I liken the response on the bigger targets to running " Bogenes " settings of zero threshold on a GPX. It seems to clip the response somewhat on deeper targets, but the little shallow targets still jump out.
I'm still leaning towards the "type" of buried nuggets as the culprit for the poor response rather than the coil or the settings. :/
Rick
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2017
- Messages
- 919
- Reaction score
- 1,256
For some time, due to my mate JR Beatty, I have been interested in and have played around with cordless systems. Today I tried a couple of different Bluetooth TX RX units, used in both cases in TX (transmit) using Bauhn Blue tooth headphones to receive.
The detector used in this test was my production model QED. Digitech Audio AA-2104 was the first one I tested. Matching the headset was fairly quick and easy, and although the volume was quite good, the sound was not good with the threshold rising and falling, and the detector seemed to be unstable. Moving the transmitter further from the control box did not seem to help much. Nothing I did seemed to make this unit more than barely usable. Thumbs down for the Digitech. Retail price $69.95
The next unit was a generic, no brand TX RX from China (where else?) This little gadget is tiny, but when I hooked it up it worked really well, provided it was not mounted on the control box. Good volume, no detectable lag, and in conjunction with the Bauhn (Aldi) headphones a nice crisp sound. Thumbs up for this combo, and cheap, as the headphones were $30 and the transmitter Less than $30.
I have organized to test some more Bluetooth products that maybe useful for detecting, and will report in the near future.
The detector used in this test was my production model QED. Digitech Audio AA-2104 was the first one I tested. Matching the headset was fairly quick and easy, and although the volume was quite good, the sound was not good with the threshold rising and falling, and the detector seemed to be unstable. Moving the transmitter further from the control box did not seem to help much. Nothing I did seemed to make this unit more than barely usable. Thumbs down for the Digitech. Retail price $69.95
The next unit was a generic, no brand TX RX from China (where else?) This little gadget is tiny, but when I hooked it up it worked really well, provided it was not mounted on the control box. Good volume, no detectable lag, and in conjunction with the Bauhn (Aldi) headphones a nice crisp sound. Thumbs up for this combo, and cheap, as the headphones were $30 and the transmitter Less than $30.
I have organized to test some more Bluetooth products that maybe useful for detecting, and will report in the near future.
I have a $38.99 Bluetooth TX from China and use
a set of Phillips $150.00 headphones.
Practically zero lag and coupled up with an Sp01,
Brillant. :Y: :Y:
There is a tiny amount of white noise in the back ground
when the TX goes into power save mode but I do not find that annoying.
On that note, When it wakes up, It is very quick so not blocking any
signals at all.
a set of Phillips $150.00 headphones.
Practically zero lag and coupled up with an Sp01,
Brillant. :Y: :Y:
There is a tiny amount of white noise in the back ground
when the TX goes into power save mode but I do not find that annoying.
On that note, When it wakes up, It is very quick so not blocking any
signals at all.
Cando
Noel
Has anyone tried using the Minelab pro-sonic???
Araratgold
Rick
Cando said:
In my test in the vid which I have pulled down, I was using the Pro Sonic and it seems to work well when I am swinging. However, like Reg has noted above, when I put the QED on the ground to investigate a target, I sometimes get a " pulsing " noise, almost like EMI , which stops when I pick the unit back up ???? :/
I have the TX unit attached to the side of the control box, so maybe this is the culprit ??? :/
Will remove the TX from the control box and see if it makes any difference. Will also tried a curly cable direct from the headphone jack to the SP01 to see if that eliminates it. :Y:
Rick
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2017
- Messages
- 919
- Reaction score
- 1,256
Rick, have not tried the pro-sonic on a QED, only briefly on a friends GPX. To me it sounded very much like the GPZ setup, but as I say, I only used it briefly.
A common criticism of the QED is that the audio is too low for some systems, so I have been looking at cheap but effective ways of remedying that situation. From all the reports that I have read, boosters seem to get a mixed revue, whether used with earphones or speakers. Both the Garret and Minelab cordless systems are expensive, and you still have to have a connection from RX to your earphones or speakers. Now that the old lag problem has been resolved the future of cordless phones and speakers has to be Bluetooth. I have a couple of good audio systems for the QED, but always on the look out for new developments.
A common criticism of the QED is that the audio is too low for some systems, so I have been looking at cheap but effective ways of remedying that situation. From all the reports that I have read, boosters seem to get a mixed revue, whether used with earphones or speakers. Both the Garret and Minelab cordless systems are expensive, and you still have to have a connection from RX to your earphones or speakers. Now that the old lag problem has been resolved the future of cordless phones and speakers has to be Bluetooth. I have a couple of good audio systems for the QED, but always on the look out for new developments.
You can find from a lot of my previous posts on here I've played around with using wireless systems on detectors for years.
On the QED I've used bluetooth Avantree Saturn Pro Aptx low latency tx/rx units & Tao Tronics Aptx low latency tx/rx units. Both had issues with a "cycling" of the threshold or rising then falling threshold as Reg describes it. I found them unusable on the QED.
These Aptx low latency units have worked well for me with other detectors both PI & VLF with no noticeable lag or any interference. IMO Aptx low latency is the only way to go with Bluetooth & I've found any other Bluetooth units I've tried before have a noticeable lag to me so was disappointed they didn't work well with the QED.
I've also tried the Minelab Pro Sonic - which is not Bluetooth but I had the same "cycling" of the threshold. The Pro Sonic uses Minelabs own proprietary wireless RF transmission system.
I had put it down to the low input volume of the QED making the wireless transmission "cycle" or think it wasn't recieving any signal momentarily? Not sure but like I have said all of them work well with other detectors without this issue.
The only wireless system I've used that's been adequate on the QED is the Seinheisser Kleer RS-160's but the tx unit is bulky in comparison to other units & you're limited to choice of headphones although they are pretty good sound + comfort wise (hot in summer). Products with Kleer wireless technology are expensive though so it's not easy to try all of them out. TDK & AKG make some lighter on ear wireless headphones with Kleer wireless technology that I may try at a later date.
Hopefully something that works well with no noticeable lag at all & isn't susceptible to interference from the detector or outside sources like EMI can be found - another issue with some wireless units. At the moment I've given up on Bluetooth + spending more time & money on experimenting with this & will be watching for what others find.
On the QED I've used bluetooth Avantree Saturn Pro Aptx low latency tx/rx units & Tao Tronics Aptx low latency tx/rx units. Both had issues with a "cycling" of the threshold or rising then falling threshold as Reg describes it. I found them unusable on the QED.
These Aptx low latency units have worked well for me with other detectors both PI & VLF with no noticeable lag or any interference. IMO Aptx low latency is the only way to go with Bluetooth & I've found any other Bluetooth units I've tried before have a noticeable lag to me so was disappointed they didn't work well with the QED.
I've also tried the Minelab Pro Sonic - which is not Bluetooth but I had the same "cycling" of the threshold. The Pro Sonic uses Minelabs own proprietary wireless RF transmission system.
I had put it down to the low input volume of the QED making the wireless transmission "cycle" or think it wasn't recieving any signal momentarily? Not sure but like I have said all of them work well with other detectors without this issue.
The only wireless system I've used that's been adequate on the QED is the Seinheisser Kleer RS-160's but the tx unit is bulky in comparison to other units & you're limited to choice of headphones although they are pretty good sound + comfort wise (hot in summer). Products with Kleer wireless technology are expensive though so it's not easy to try all of them out. TDK & AKG make some lighter on ear wireless headphones with Kleer wireless technology that I may try at a later date.
Hopefully something that works well with no noticeable lag at all & isn't susceptible to interference from the detector or outside sources like EMI can be found - another issue with some wireless units. At the moment I've given up on Bluetooth + spending more time & money on experimenting with this & will be watching for what others find.
Araratgold said:
Rick will be interested to see the results from that ? When you say straight from headphone jack ............... from jack on QED? Now that the dust has settled maybe your vid can be re posted ? Contrary to what's been implied I'm simply seeking some good honest unbiased and unadulterated info on this unit.
Considering the minimal outlay to purchase very close to giving the little fella a shot :Y:Re the cordless .................. find at times it's a toss up what's more hassle, a cord joining you to the machine or the extra do dads that one has hanging from the harness and machine along with having to charge units etc to enable the wireless set up to be used
Then the final result has to be taken into account .................. re quality of sound / signal and delay if any ? Delay being my biggest concern as that coil in a split second can be the difference of it being over the target or past it - Joined
- Sep 6, 2017
- Messages
- 919
- Reaction score
- 1,256
Like mbasko I use the Seinheisser RS-160 system which works really well with no lag, cycling, or interference to or from the electronics. The Kleer RX can be mounted using Velcro directly on top of the early QED control box or on the side with the later model. For the summer months I have been using the Garret Z-Link RX TX which has good volume like the R-160, and no lag cycling or interference. The TX is designed to fit on the shaft, just in front of the control box using a rubber band which fits around the TX, beneath the shaft, then back around the TX. This holds the unit firmly in place. The RX (with volume control) has a wire clip that enables you to attach it to your shirt pocket, T shirt etc. From the RX I am running a set of Bose noise cancelling ear buds which I can only describe as fantastic. (they would need to be for the price) The beauty of this arrangement is that in summer I can wear a broad rimmed hat.
My latest experiment, and by far the cheapest option, is the tiny generic Chinese Bluetooth TX (it can transmit or receive) which I got from Wiltronics in Ballarat. I think it should be available from Jaycar. This unit I mounted on the stem in the same way as the Z-Link as it did cause interference when mounted on the control box. Set up in this manner it has adequate volume, no lag or cycling and matches well with Bauhn Bluetooth headphones which have volume control.
I plan to test noise cancelling Bluetooth headphones as soon as I do a bit more research. The advantage of a no lag Bluetoth setup is that unlike the Minelab or Garret cordless, there is no separate RX unit, as this is built directly into the headphones. Both TX and phones need to be charged, but this is simple if done at the same time as the detector is charged. All units have plenty of charge life.
My latest experiment, and by far the cheapest option, is the tiny generic Chinese Bluetooth TX (it can transmit or receive) which I got from Wiltronics in Ballarat. I think it should be available from Jaycar. This unit I mounted on the stem in the same way as the Z-Link as it did cause interference when mounted on the control box. Set up in this manner it has adequate volume, no lag or cycling and matches well with Bauhn Bluetooth headphones which have volume control.
I plan to test noise cancelling Bluetooth headphones as soon as I do a bit more research. The advantage of a no lag Bluetoth setup is that unlike the Minelab or Garret cordless, there is no separate RX unit, as this is built directly into the headphones. Both TX and phones need to be charged, but this is simple if done at the same time as the detector is charged. All units have plenty of charge life.
Araratgold
Rick
Bogger said:Araratgold said:
Rick will be interested to see the results from that ? When you say straight from headphone jack ............... from jack on QED? Now that the dust has settled maybe your vid can be re posted ? Contrary to what's been implied I'm simply seeking some good honest unbiased and unadulterated info on this unit.
Re the cordless .................. find at times it's a toss up what's more hassle, a cord joining you to the machine or the extra do dads that one has hanging from the harness and machine along with having to charge units etc to enable the wireless set up to be used
Yes, a lead straight from the QED jack to the SP01. Will tell me straight away whether the Pro Sonic on the control box is the cause of the noises. :Y:
Im hearing you on the wireless vs wired. If you have a long curly cord there's really no issue, vs the added modules you need for wireless, recharging, lag etc etc !
Rick
Araratgold
Rick
Gidday All,
Since the weather has improved dramatically, I flew out to the State Forest where I did my QED testing last week, and got a couple of hours of new testing done.
I used an 11 inch Commander this time, and it validated my testing from last week. As a result, I have put that video back up, because the settings were not botched as a few unkind individuals have suggested. Nor is there anything wrong with the coil ! :Y:
This lot of testing showed what I had suspected from last week, that the type of nuggets and also how they are situated in the ground has a big bearing on how the QED gets them !
The testing showed that the GPX with the 17x11 N/F Advantage was a bit better to the QED on all the targets, especially the ones that were standing on end, and the GPZ19 creamed them both !
Gain on the GPX4500 was at 10 out of 15, so not nearly flat out like the QED gain was ( 9 out of 10 ).
Anyway, the new video is pretty self explanatory, so please enjoy ! Filmed in HD.
Cheers,
Rick
[video=480,360]https://youtu.be/E3_97SSwqVY[/video]
[video=480,360]https://youtu.be/Da5L4fY7n0I[/video]
Since the weather has improved dramatically, I flew out to the State Forest where I did my QED testing last week, and got a couple of hours of new testing done.
I used an 11 inch Commander this time, and it validated my testing from last week. As a result, I have put that video back up, because the settings were not botched as a few unkind individuals have suggested. Nor is there anything wrong with the coil ! :Y:
This lot of testing showed what I had suspected from last week, that the type of nuggets and also how they are situated in the ground has a big bearing on how the QED gets them !
The testing showed that the GPX with the 17x11 N/F Advantage was a bit better to the QED on all the targets, especially the ones that were standing on end, and the GPZ19 creamed them both !
Gain on the GPX4500 was at 10 out of 15, so not nearly flat out like the QED gain was ( 9 out of 10 ).
Anyway, the new video is pretty self explanatory, so please enjoy ! Filmed in HD.
Cheers,
Rick
[video=480,360]https://youtu.be/E3_97SSwqVY[/video]
[video=480,360]https://youtu.be/Da5L4fY7n0I[/video]
Thanks Rick for taking the time to do the vid. As a layman the result to me is what I would expect when seeing a 2K machine put up against a 10K machine and the brand name of either or both has no relevance. It simply is what it is and can really only be left up to the buyer to decide if it meets and suits the purpose for which they are purchasing it. :Y:
Goldchaser1
dave
Interesting rick,it goes ok but,well i gotta say my hats off to ya for persisting with it,seems to run ok on that ground i think compared to the early ones,still think you might have trouble over here on laterite,wouldnt mind seeing it run if ya come through Kal,got a spot for ya,be keen to see if it can go ok now with the updates,thanks good viewing.....
- Joined
- May 1, 2018
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 3
Hey all, I am running a QED PL2 also, I have a 10lt bucket of scrap metal in the shed that suggests I'm operating the machine well. No elusive yellow metal just yet though. I am curious on any users who are having some success.. Are there any photos in this thread of peoples finds? Cheers, Zac.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
