Minelab GPX6000 release, general information and questions

Prospecting Australia

Help Support Prospecting Australia:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
kingswood said:
grubstake said:
Instead of a speculative video, there's some brief but fresh actual 'hand's-on' comments and discussion here:

Quick Air Test Of GPX 6000
https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/15143-quick-air-test-of-gpx-6000/
Click to expand...
And finally a comparison by ML with the zed!!
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/11203/1613273328_6000.jpg

(Apologies in advance for stealing the pic :playful: )
Click to expand...

C'mon.... 5 stars to the 6000 and 1 star to the 7000 for .05 nuggets?? My Zed picks up .04 down to around 100mm size all day long, clear as day. :playful:
 
Nice scored card for the 6K.... :power: I wonder how much improvement a spiral wound coil like the Evo will provide. The 5K coupled with spiral coils comes close to the Zed in certain situations. Not excited about panning for flakes of gold with it though.... joking, all gold is good gold. I would like to know how they come up with that comparison between all the detectors & coils used! it makes the SDC look really sad.
 
Joeboy said:
I would like to know how they come up with that comparison between all the detectors & coils used! it makes the SDC look really sad.
Click to expand...

It's simple, you never let the truth get in the way of a good story ;)
 
A-team said:
kingswood said:
grubstake said:
Instead of a speculative video, there's some brief but fresh actual 'hand's-on' comments and discussion here:

Quick Air Test Of GPX 6000
https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/15143-quick-air-test-of-gpx-6000/
Click to expand...
And finally a comparison by ML with the zed!!
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/11203/1613273328_6000.jpg

(Apologies in advance for stealing the pic :playful: )
Click to expand...

C'mon.... 5 stars to the 6000 and 1 star to the 7000 for .05 nuggets?? My Zed picks up .04 down to around 100mm size all day long, clear as day. :playful:
Click to expand...
in my opinion, this is just a publicity stunt. time will tell.
 
A-team said:
kingswood said:
grubstake said:
Instead of a speculative video, there's some brief but fresh actual 'hand's-on' comments and discussion here:

Quick Air Test Of GPX 6000
https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/15143-quick-air-test-of-gpx-6000/
Click to expand...
And finally a comparison by ML with the zed!!
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/11203/1613273328_6000.jpg

(Apologies in advance for stealing the pic :playful: )
Click to expand...

C'mon.... 5 stars to the 6000 and 1 star to the 7000 for .05 nuggets?? My Zed picks up .04 down to around 100mm size all day long, clear as day. :playful:
Click to expand...
Going off that it means the gpx6000 will find them at 500mm. How much fun will that be, a half meter hole to find a 0.05g nugget!
My hope is it handles salt and ground moisture better than the Z
 
davent said:
Well we still dont know what it does yet do we.
Whats geo sense?
Click to expand...

This could be the most overlooked question to date hopefully.

Jokingly at first i thought it might be a sense of loneliness a geo often experienced in their line of work :lol: .

Now but i have read snippets of speculation it ground balances (or at least sends info) from geo references via satellite to your location ? That would open up a whole lot more questions for me like what are the limitations of info you could receive in the future from previous data and such.

Maybe i have the speculation all wrong but a fun thought none the less.
 
kingswood said:
grubstake said:
Instead of a speculative video, there's some brief but fresh actual 'hand's-on' comments and discussion here:

Quick Air Test Of GPX 6000
https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/15143-quick-air-test-of-gpx-6000/
Click to expand...
And finally a comparison by ML with the zed!!
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/11203/1613273328_6000.jpg

(Apologies in advance for stealing the pic :playful: )
Click to expand...
But relative to what level of ground mineralization, EMI, ground water content, ambient/ground temperature, target depth, settings, mono or DD coil, and coil size. :/
 
Dignit said:
kingswood said:
grubstake said:
Instead of a speculative video, there's some brief but fresh actual 'hand's-on' comments and discussion here:

Quick Air Test Of GPX 6000
https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/15143-quick-air-test-of-gpx-6000/
Click to expand...
And finally a comparison by ML with the zed!!
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/11203/1613273328_6000.jpg

(Apologies in advance for stealing the pic :playful: )
Click to expand...
But relative to what level of ground mineralization, EMI, ground water content, ambient/ground temperature, target depth, settings, mono or DD coil, and coil size. :/
Click to expand...
Trade Secret :playful:
But yeah I am hearing you!...It is kinda pointless putting up a chart if we dont know that info. Hopefully we know soon enough :)
 
Dignit said:
But relative to what level of ground mineralization, EMI, ground water content, ambient/ground temperature, target depth, settings, mono or DD coil, and coil size. :/
Click to expand...

There will always be so many variables when it comes to comparisons, so we just need to think about it as a generalisation based on the capabilities of the tech that is involved. The way I interpret the star rating system is not depth, but repeatability on that size target. One of the smallest nuggets I found for many years was with a GP extreme, which originally weighed 0.02g. Years later when using some better scales it was closer to 0.06g, but how many did I find that size with any of the GP series?? Very very few.
When the GPX came out and in particular the 4500 & 5000, finding stuff under 0.1g was a lot more regular, but they were usually quite smooth and/or flat. It wasn't until the 2300 came out that I was finding all sorts of gold under 0.1g that was weird and unusual shaped. Was it profitable? Maybe not initially, but it did find me a few areas where I'd found very little or nothing in the past, and they were the first spots to get another look when the GPZ came out. Knowing the 7000 could pick up the same type of gold as the SDC just at much better depth meant that in the right areas it did some damage. However, when using it in other spots where the gold was more of a sluggy nature, the GPX's cleaned it up pretty well, but if the ground was mild enough to allow Normal to be used, the Zed still managed to ping some nice nuggets.

When you look back on the current range of detectors as well as older PI's, each machine has its strengths and weaknesses. Forget the weaknesses, and focus on how you are going leverage to off its strengths - after all, we are the prospector, the detector is only the tool. It's up to us to use the right tools for the job.
 
Make sure you don't have short memories, Minelab released a star chart comparison when the Zed came out, from my experience it was pretty much spot on.
Also with regard to advertising they are subject to the laws and liability of the land and if they are blatantly wrong in their as some of you pessamists are suggesting then you should buy one and let a good lawyer make some money for you.

I believe Minelab is a responsible manufacturer, probably the main reason they have been so successful globally.

Personally I think the 6000 will highly likely be a really good detector and the only caution worth stressing about is that there are no manufacturing bugs in the early models as often happens with lots of new products of any description. I'm not going to wait to see if they are bug free as Minelab have honoured their warranty with me on a previous occasion.

And as others have pointed out, detectors don't work if the detectorists don't swing in the right places.

johno
 
We got so much rain up here in FNQ grass, grass & more grass :awful: it'll be awhile before we hit any fields within a couple of hours drive from Cairns. So plenty of time to decide on which upgrade to go with, from the 5k.... I'll be waiting for Nenad's review on it first, because he knows his :poop:
 
After years telling us that Threshold is important, i guess the new tech in the 6000 makes that largely redundant:
1613384994_screenshot_at_2021-02-15_18-01-44.jpg

"No threshold tone. Recommended for most users".
If thats the case, then that is an exciting development.
 
Interesting stuff! Reading another minelab patent, I would imagine that the 6000 has some advanced signal processing that causes the noise from the ground and EMI to be calculated and ignored. Hence why it can be a silent threshold.
This patent talks about multiple readings from the ground that are processed and applied to different channels simultaneously.
"generating a transmit magnetic field for transmission into the soil based on a transmit signal; receiving a receive magnetic field, providing a receive signal induced by the receive magnetic field; determining, based on the receive signal, a model of at least two independent components of the receive signal which are due to signals from the soil; processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom by fitting the model to the receive signal, then subtracting the fitted model from the receive signal; and producing, based on the set of data, an indicator output signal for indicating a presence and/or identity of the target."
"In the previous calculations we have represented the signals as vectors of values. In practice, the receive signal can be represented as a vector of values, for instance by sampling the receive signal at various times with each sample representing a value in the vector representation, or by synchronously demodulating the receive signal with multiple time windows to produce multiple channels in the case of a PI or PI-like metal detector"
"Recording the receive signal over some time in an environment where there are multiple independent components allows us to decompose the recorded receive signal into its independent components. That is, we can determine what the independent components are for a particular soil."
"a magnetic field transmitter generating a transmit magnetic field for transmission into the soil based on a transmit signal;
a magnetic field receiver receiving a receive magnetic field;
providing to a processing unit a receive signal induced by the receive magnetic field;
the processing unit determining, based on the receive signal, from a plurality of possible models, a model of at least two independent components of the receive signal which are due to signals from the soil, wherein the model provides an estimation of at least three different channels;
the processing unit processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom by fitting the determined model to the receive signal, then subtracting the fitted model from the receive signal; and
the processing unit producing, based on the set of data, an indicator output signal for indicating at least one of a presence and an identity of the target;
wherein the step of processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom includes:
sampling or demodulating the receive signal to produce the at least three channels;
fitting the model to the at least three channels; and
subtracting the fitted model from at least one of the at least three channels." (https://patents.justia.com/patent/9366779)

So basically, taking into account some of the black magic I dont fully understand!....Geosense may relate to the detector taking constant readings of the soil components and assigning these to signal processing channels. These signals are then combined to produce a data set. The presence of a target then happens when the received signal differs from the processed data in the data set.
I think :/
Sounds cool. I want one :)
 
kingswood said:
Interesting stuff! Reading another minelab patent, I would imagine that the 6000 has some advanced signal processing that causes the noise from the ground and EMI to be calculated and ignored. Hence why it can be a silent threshold.
This patent talks about multiple readings from the ground that are processed and applied to different channels simultaneously.
"generating a transmit magnetic field for transmission into the soil based on a transmit signal; receiving a receive magnetic field, providing a receive signal induced by the receive magnetic field; determining, based on the receive signal, a model of at least two independent components of the receive signal which are due to signals from the soil; processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom by fitting the model to the receive signal, then subtracting the fitted model from the receive signal; and producing, based on the set of data, an indicator output signal for indicating a presence and/or identity of the target."
"In the previous calculations we have represented the signals as vectors of values. In practice, the receive signal can be represented as a vector of values, for instance by sampling the receive signal at various times with each sample representing a value in the vector representation, or by synchronously demodulating the receive signal with multiple time windows to produce multiple channels in the case of a PI or PI-like metal detector"
"Recording the receive signal over some time in an environment where there are multiple independent components allows us to decompose the recorded receive signal into its independent components. That is, we can determine what the independent components are for a particular soil."
"a magnetic field transmitter generating a transmit magnetic field for transmission into the soil based on a transmit signal;
a magnetic field receiver receiving a receive magnetic field;
providing to a processing unit a receive signal induced by the receive magnetic field;
the processing unit determining, based on the receive signal, from a plurality of possible models, a model of at least two independent components of the receive signal which are due to signals from the soil, wherein the model provides an estimation of at least three different channels;
the processing unit processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom by fitting the determined model to the receive signal, then subtracting the fitted model from the receive signal; and
the processing unit producing, based on the set of data, an indicator output signal for indicating at least one of a presence and an identity of the target;
wherein the step of processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom includes:
sampling or demodulating the receive signal to produce the at least three channels;
fitting the model to the at least three channels; and
subtracting the fitted model from at least one of the at least three channels." (https://patents.justia.com/patent/9366779)

So basically, taking into account some of the black magic I dont fully understand!....Geosense may relate to the detector taking constant readings of the soil components and assigning these to signal processing channels. These signals are then combined to produce a data set. The presence of a target then happens when the received signal differs from the processed data in the data set.
I think :/
Sounds cool. I want one :)
Click to expand...

It would be good for the GPX6000 after doing all it's signal processing over a target, to have an option with detector to confirm if the target was actually gold or not. Like a self learning AI software to develop algorithms to suit that particular area your detecting in. Imagine picking up a couple of hot rocks then telling the detector to identify these targets as hot rocks. No more digging up hot rocks in that area again!! Wishful thinking, but After all... it is called the Geosense :goldnugget:
 
So all good points! Geosense = geology sensing; ground sensing algorithm to return the best settings/timings for detected soil etc... don't think this is geographic sensing as that make no sense, pun intended.

So with this new technology, surely an algorithm can be designed to automatically determine ferrous/non-ferous materials signal signatures with a similar degree of accuracy. That would eliminate a HUGE amount of trash targets? ...but then we wouldn't be doing our duty as detectorist of cleaning up the bush ;)

...just carrying on the anticipation for the release of the 6000 super detector extraordinaire - able to leap tall buildings in a single bound and find all gold, anywhere, any size, any time.....

Detectors of yesteryear....

The GPX 5000 sets a high benchmark in gold detecting technology. Featuring Minelab's exclusive technologies, Multi Period Sensing (MPS), Dual Voltage Technology (DVT) and Smart Electronic Timing Alignment (SETA), the high performance GPX 5000 is extremely capable of finding more gold than other brand detectors. From sub-gram nuggets to the elusive 'retirement nugget' and everything in between, with the GPX 5000, you can find it.

1613522554_gpx-depth.jpg
 
Joeboy said:
kingswood said:
Interesting stuff! Reading another minelab patent, I would imagine that the 6000 has some advanced signal processing that causes the noise from the ground and EMI to be calculated and ignored. Hence why it can be a silent threshold.
This patent talks about multiple readings from the ground that are processed and applied to different channels simultaneously.
"generating a transmit magnetic field for transmission into the soil based on a transmit signal; receiving a receive magnetic field, providing a receive signal induced by the receive magnetic field; determining, based on the receive signal, a model of at least two independent components of the receive signal which are due to signals from the soil; processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom by fitting the model to the receive signal, then subtracting the fitted model from the receive signal; and producing, based on the set of data, an indicator output signal for indicating a presence and/or identity of the target."
"In the previous calculations we have represented the signals as vectors of values. In practice, the receive signal can be represented as a vector of values, for instance by sampling the receive signal at various times with each sample representing a value in the vector representation, or by synchronously demodulating the receive signal with multiple time windows to produce multiple channels in the case of a PI or PI-like metal detector"
"Recording the receive signal over some time in an environment where there are multiple independent components allows us to decompose the recorded receive signal into its independent components. That is, we can determine what the independent components are for a particular soil."
"a magnetic field transmitter generating a transmit magnetic field for transmission into the soil based on a transmit signal;
a magnetic field receiver receiving a receive magnetic field;
providing to a processing unit a receive signal induced by the receive magnetic field;
the processing unit determining, based on the receive signal, from a plurality of possible models, a model of at least two independent components of the receive signal which are due to signals from the soil, wherein the model provides an estimation of at least three different channels;
the processing unit processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom by fitting the determined model to the receive signal, then subtracting the fitted model from the receive signal; and
the processing unit producing, based on the set of data, an indicator output signal for indicating at least one of a presence and an identity of the target;
wherein the step of processing the receive signal to produce a set of data which is with effects of the signals from the soil reduced therein or removed therefrom includes:
sampling or demodulating the receive signal to produce the at least three channels;
fitting the model to the at least three channels; and
subtracting the fitted model from at least one of the at least three channels." (https://patents.justia.com/patent/9366779)

So basically, taking into account some of the black magic I dont fully understand!....Geosense may relate to the detector taking constant readings of the soil components and assigning these to signal processing channels. These signals are then combined to produce a data set. The presence of a target then happens when the received signal differs from the processed data in the data set.
I think :/
Sounds cool. I want one :)
Click to expand...

It would be good for the GPX6000 after doing all it's signal processing over a target, to have an option with detector to confirm if the target was actually gold or not. Like a self learning AI software to develop algorithms to suit that particular area your detecting in. Imagine picking up a couple of hot rocks then telling the detector to identify these targets as hot rocks. No more digging up hot rocks in that area again!! Wishful thinking, but After all... it is called the Geosense :goldnugget:
Click to expand...
I think wishful thinking :( trying to make sense of the patent, if it is constantly collecting and processing ground info, it would possibly eliminate some of the more common hot rocks in the area, but there will always be those pesky ones with a completely different signature that would be detected. I recall JP saying "Mineralisation is your best friend when looking for a patch, listening for when the back ground mineralisation levels rise and the occurrence of hot rocks becoming more common place can indicate a virgin patch missed by others who might have chosen timings that ironed out all the ground noise."...so hot rocks can be helpful :)
I will be interested to see how "normal" ground setting goes with the mono coil in terms of eliminating hot rocks...and then, how much loss of depth and sensitivity occurs if you have to whack it into difficult ground. and then how much sensitivity and depth is lost if you have to whack on the DD and use conductive ground setting.
Despite all that, I love the concept of advanced signal processing of ground noises and whatever other secrets are driving the geo-sense :)
The more I read of the 6, i think its going to be a winner! :goldnugget: :goldnugget: :goldnugget:
 

Similar threads

R
Whites MXT Engineering Report By Dave Johnson
Replies
2
Views
4K
Ridge Runner
R

Latest posts

Top