What worked and didn't work so well
back then, and how it relates to many of the makes and models of detectors used today, as well as the available headphones can be an interesting study .... f someone wanted to pass the time during 'cabin fever season' and had test sample detectors and headphones to tinker with. As for me, no thinks. I've been down that road before and did enough side-by-side comparisons using an assortment of detectors, the different versions of the "Depthmaster" models, and most of the popular headphones available at the time. And when I say
"at the time" it relates to 1988 to 1990.
Back then, MOST of the headphones sold in the metal detector dealer's stores were 8 ohm, 16 ohm, and the then-popular 32 ohm speakers like the Cal-Rad 135's. With a few better headphones on the market with speakers rated in the 100 to 150 ohm range, we did have some better options to hear some of the weaker or fainter audio responses that were more difficult to hear with the lower-quality, wimpier-performance 'budget' headphones. And, since most detectors in use at that time, and certainly a bulk of what were being offered as new, were based on an analog circuitry design there was less designed-in performance for those weaker signals.
Therefore, some makes and models were able to benefit from a signal-enhancing device that might boost those weaker signals. All Metal mode or a motion-based Disc. mode., with or without a Threshold audio, could get produce a little louder audio response we could hear from a weaker audio report. Not with all makes and models, but with some, or many really. But I never perceived any real depth increase, just a louder sounding
(volume) from those weaker audio responses that were otherwise difficult for me to hear. Part of that was from being somewhat hearing impaired. But there had to be a weaker sounding, or slight audio, response to be enhanced or they didn't work.
With the better headphones that soon flourished on the market, such as those from Detector Pro or Killer B and similar, using the high-impedance speakers, those made up most of what was needed in hearing fainter or weaker audio responses. Then we have to also consider how many manufacturers also addressed the audio response performance of their detectors by boosting some of the signals, going to digitally designed circuitry to help with some signal processing, but mainly by simply going to a Saturated Audio instead of a Modulated Audio. Today, many makes and models use a more saturated audio, at least for a greater percentage of their audio processing and then a modulated response for the last little bit. Not all of them but many.
I have always maintained at least one or two of my favorite Tesoro models in my Detector Outfit since mid-'83, and both of my current
microMAX models do have a stronger audio response but are still modulated. However, I use quality headphones with very good speaker impedance and I don't feel I suffer from a weaker signal response such that it impedes my performance afield. To me, that's a lot better than using some additional signal enhancing device.
Monte
"Your EYES ... the only 100% accurate form of Discrimination!"
Stinkwater Wells Trading Post
Metal Detector Evaluations and Product Reviews monte@ahrps.org ... or ... monte@stinkwaterwells.com 503-481-8147Nokta / Makro: FORS CoRe, FORS Relic, Racer 2 and Simplex + also using Makro and Pulse-Dive PinpointersTesoro: Bandido II µMAX and Silver Sabre µMAX ... White's: modified IDX Pro ... XP: ORX ... Fisher: F44Headphones: Killer B's 'Hornet' and 'Wasp' -- Detector Pro Gray Ghost XPNote: Detectors are listed alphabetically by Brand. Models are chosen based on search site conditions.*** All working well today to make memories for tomorrow. ***
