QED Info Thread.

Prospecting Australia

Help Support Prospecting Australia:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I see Howard has finally acknowledged the problem with the QED that I highlighted when I tried to use it as a patch hunting detector in WA.
This is the very same problem that at least 4 other people had in WA ( as reported by Madtuna ).

I got lambasted by the Doug and Bugs crew and told that I didn't know how to use the QED, that I was a Minelab stooge, that my report was a hatchet job etc etc, but here is the admission that THERE IS A PROBLEM ! :mad:

From Howard on Doug's AEGP forum :

" Better GB ie ability to handle higher intensity ground variability without constant re Ground Balancing. "

This is the exact problem that made the QED useless for patch hunting in WA, in combination with lack of automatic ground tracking, which is the other thing Howard is trying to achieve.

Rick
 
mbasko said:
I found it could be a pain constantly adjusting the ground balance even in some NSW areas.
Click to expand...
Just to clarify my comment here due to it being used out of context elsewhere to once again suggest I didn't know how to use the QED.
Where I detected with the QED in NSW could be broken down into 3 categories:
1. QED ran smoothly with little or no problems. Very little ground balancing/re-ground balancing required
2. QED mostly ran smoothly with some issues with hot rocks & pockets of hot ground requiring some re-ground balancing + adjustment of settings
3. QED had a lot of issues with ground + hot rocks, constant re-ground balancing required, use of higher modes required.
Most ground fell into categories 1 & 2. Mostly the QED was very easy to use & (as per the manual) I could keep it in lower modes depending on coil & ground balancing was easy + easy to keep smooth.
SOME ground in category 2 & the ground in category 3 I was finding even using higher modes I needed to keep the manual balance screen open to frequently adjust ground balance or to check spurious noise by adjusting (-/+4). Later it was recommended I check by adjusting -/+8. This was a pain & the constant spurious noises in areas was frustrating to me. It may not be a pain or frustrating to others? It's these areas that I prefer the ground balance, quick track button & tracking (when used - rarely) of the GPX. IMO it's a lot quicker & more refined for these areas.
To the person making assumptions:
- have you ever gone gold detecting with the QED in real world conditions? NO
- have you ever found gold in real world conditions with the QED? No
- I am quite adept at using detector setting & have used several different makers & models including VLF, PI & ZVT successfully finding gold with each. I'm no Reg Wilson but I do ok as a hobbyist & found gold with the QED in SOME of these more difficult areas, SOME of which I posted on this forum & DP forum in the earlier days.
- the modes on the QED were used in all conditions above with some modes found to be better with some coils over others. The small test piece I was recommended to use in most cases was very clear in modes 1 to 3 (I found modes 1 & 2 unusable in all but very mild ground). It was still very clear to clear in modes 4 to 8. From mode 8 on the signal diminished so there is some loss of sensitivity but then these modes are recomnended more for larger coils & hence larger gold so no shock there.
- the higher modes are more susceptible to EMI. This is noted in the manual & the manual recommends using as low a mode as possible.
- the highest gain I could successfully detect with in any mode was around 5-6 but was usually set around 3 -5 depending on prevailing conditions on the day. I found this to my liking.
- after my initial problems trying to use wireless systems & settling on the Seinheisser RS160 headphones the QED was very nice to use.

I am no stranger to trying to make use of settings - in fact I regularly try Normal on the GPX in mild areas, mainly use Sensitive Extra & try to only use Enhance where I have to all with mono coils. This will probably mean little to someone who doesn't detect & only knows about settings from reading about them or being told about them rather than real, actual use of them.

I stand by my comments:
Better ground balance in variable ground & ground tracking will be good advances for the QED.
If this wasn't an issue to anyone still using the QED why the upgrades? :|
 
mbasko, I'm afraid in the past your words have been 'cherry picked' and taken out of context by those wishing to denigrate the QED, and I'm glad you have clarified this. I have no disagreement with what you have written here, and find it quite a fair analysis. The QED was not the only detector to struggle in some situations, and the mode range on early models, although adequate for most conditions, was not perfect for some highly mineralized ground. The extended mode on the later PL2 has markedly improved this situation, however, Howard, never one to rest on his laurels, is intent on improving the QED even further, and even better performance on difficult ground is just around the corner.
Updating of the QED is an ongoing evolution, and those wishing to have their machines brought up to current specs need only to pay for freight. The software updates are free. Any physical updates to the PL1 model will incur a small fee as casings and battery systems will need to be changed. My advice to PL1 owners would be to install whatever battery system you like, keep the electronics and display the way they are, and simply update the software.
 
Araratgold said:
I see Howard has finally acknowledged the problem with the QED that I highlighted when I tried to use it as a patch hunting detector in WA.
This is the very same problem that at least 4 other people had in WA ( as reported by Madtuna ).

I got lambasted by the Doug and Bugs crew and told that I didn't know how to use the QED, that I was a Minelab stooge, that my report was a hatchet job etc etc, but here is the admission that THERE IS A PROBLEM ! :mad:

From Howard on Doug's AEGP forum :

" Better GB ie ability to handle higher intensity ground variability without constant re Ground Balancing. "

This is the exact problem that made the QED useless for patch hunting in WA, in combination with lack of automatic ground tracking, which is the other thing Howard is trying to achieve.

Rick
Click to expand...

Rick, it doesnt matter, it just does not matter!

Isnt it a good thing that Howard is putting time and effort into improving this unit?

People need to realise the biggest issue the QED has is the clashes between the personalities of the fors and against.

Positive think tank from all parties would only benefit all in the long run.

Al.
 
Hi Rockhunter, perhaps you would care to relay such thoughts to those on the 1.5 forum? A very friendly bunch who no doubt take such advice.
 
Hi Doug,

I have mentioned in that forum along the lines of not focusing on neg replies particularly from elsewhere.

Once more - People need to realise the biggest issue the QED has is the clashes between the personalities of the fors and against

Imagine if there wasnt any testosterone fuelled personality lulls discussing this home grown detector!

Both parties can be at fault. No fight otherwise!

Al.
 
Aussiedigs said:
Hi Doug,

I have mentioned in that forum along the lines of not focusing on neg replies particularly from elsewhere.

Once more - People need to realise the biggest issue the QED has is the clashes between the personalities of the fors and against

Imagine if there wasnt any testosterone fuelled personality lulls discussing this home grown detector!

Both parties can be at fault. No fight otherwise!

Al.
Click to expand...

Hi Al,
I agree the bickering and crap needs to stop, but people are also entitled to be made aware of the negatives of ANY product just the same as the positives.

If we were only fed the positives we'd all be driving Great Wall utes.

There were a lot of negatives when used as a prospecting tool here in WA (hopefully that will be negated by the new software updates) Unfortunately most people who brought those negatives to attention were belittled across a number of forums so much so that a number I personally spoke to last year refuse to bring them up on any forum.

The biggest issue I can see with the QED is the forum and the forum owner it is tied to. Howard would do well IMO to distance himself from that place. The same information should be freely available to everybody not just members of that forum as so many are not even allowed to join.
Until that happens there will always be a shirt fight.
 
madtuna, there is more than one forum on the internet, and there is probably more information on the QED on other forums other than Doug's. You single out that one forum for criticism, but lets not forget that there is another forum, that I shall not name, that is totally dedicated to the denigration and even destruction of the QED. The personal attacks and low tactics actually put the QED promoting forum in a positive light in comparison. I would point out that some that have criticized the QED on this and other respected forums have also posted prolifically on the anti QED forum. They seem to have no qualms in associating with people that have a very obvious vested interest in the sabotage of the QED using the most obnoxious tactics.
There has been a most interesting and unexpected result of the unrelenting QED attacks, and one that I can't help chuckling over. Visitors to the 'cess pit' forum and others have wondered,"if this detector that they pour disdain and unrelenting attacks upon is so bad, why do they bother with it at all? A machine that flawed could not be a threat to any other manufacturer. Why then do they spend so much time constantly running it down? I think I might look into this a little more."
The result has been, that indeed, they have investigated further and have discovered that far from being the junk claimed, that it is indeed a very capable competitor to the main brand detectors at a most reasonable price. In a number of cases the knockers have had their vitriol backfire on them when interested people have taken their time to do some real research on the QED. I had one QED buyer tell me,"my curiosity was aroused by a forum owner who fanatically attacked the QED and anyone associated with it". His investigation led him to actually trying a QED for himself, and he was so impressed that he bought two. One for himself, and one for his wife who would not use his other detector because it was too heavy.

So on behalf of Howard, thank you to the knockers, you have been most helpful.
 
madtuna said:
Aussiedigs said:
Hi Doug,

I have mentioned in that forum along the lines of not focusing on neg replies particularly from elsewhere.

Once more - People need to realise the biggest issue the QED has is the clashes between the personalities of the fors and against

Imagine if there wasnt any testosterone fuelled personality lulls discussing this home grown detector!

Both parties can be at fault. No fight otherwise!

Al.
Click to expand...

Hi Al,
I agree the bickering and crap needs to stop, but people are also entitled to be made aware of the negatives of ANY product just the same as the positives.

If we were only fed the positives we'd all be driving Great Wall utes.

There were a lot of negatives when used as a prospecting tool here in WA (hopefully that will be negated by the new software updates) Unfortunately most people who brought those negatives to attention were belittled across a number of forums so much so that a number I personally spoke to last year refuse to bring them up on any forum.

The biggest issue I can see with the QED is the forum and the forum owner it is tied to. Howard would do well IMO to distance himself from that place. The same information should be freely available to everybody not just members of that forum as so many are not even allowed to join.
Until that happens there will always be a shirt fight.
Click to expand...

Hi Madtuna,

Sure, pointing out negs shouldnt be met with the threat of retribution.

It still comes down to how or whether you respond to attacks. Its not about what he said she said, its how we deal with it, regardless of which camp.

Being new to detecting i had a hard time trying to decipher all the too and fros!

Its an undeniable fact - if you remove all ego/attitudes, the air would be clear air. Wasted energy that could be used in a positive manner.

Al.
 
mbasko, I don't agree with the way you are treated on Doug's forum, and it reflects badly on the QED. Howard has very little say on that forum unfortunately, and I know he like myself is not always happy with some of the posts and posters.
For what it is worth I shall appeal to them to keep it civil, but don't put too much faith in them taking any notice of me.
 
Yeah Reg, I did single out that forum, after all it promotes itself as the home of the QED and the only one where you can dirrectly speak to the manufacturer.

That other forum I wouldn't even class it as a gold or prospecting forum and I sure as hell wouldn't go there for any info on detectors and prospecting.
 

Similar threads

Nathan
First timer visiting Bendigo and surrounds
Replies
9
Views
503
Jigalong
Jigalong
P
Hi from a relative newbie.
Replies
18
Views
1K
ProspectingPip
P
U
  • Locked
  • Sticky
⚠️ QED section - please read before posting.
Replies
0
Views
2K
user 4485
U
Colb20173
Stumpy Pick's Rock Crusher
Replies
8
Views
3K
Colb20173
Colb20173
U
  • Locked
  • Sticky
⚠️ Trading Rules and Advice - Please Read Before Posting
Replies
0
Views
11K
user 4485
U

Latest posts

Top