In part one I explained what ‘Two Tone Ferrous’ (TTF) is and how it works. In part two I’ll explain why I use it…
For me, deciding whether to use ferrous tones or conductive tones depends on the amount and type of "trash" at each site. As a coin-shooter who hunts old farm sites, I believe there are instances where TTF is the optimum choice.
If I am hunting an old farm site with an abundance of iron trash, I run a fairly “open screen” using TTF (little or no discrimination). A low tone is provided for all targets with ferrous readings of 18 or higher. The low tone allows me to sort those high ferrous targets out “by ear”, and ignore them, without having to look at the meter. On the other hand, if I am in an area with the typical "non-ferrous" trash (pull tabs, foil, screw caps, can slaw, etc), implementing two tone ferrous would require me to look at the meter every time the (17 or lower) ferrous properties of those targets produced it's high tone. In these particular sites, I prefer multiple tones in the conductive mode as it allows me to sort out many of those targets “by ear“, based on the sounds representing their conductivity value.
Whether I monitor ferrous tones or conductive tones, as well as making a determination as to the number of tones I use to accomplish my objective, is site dependent. Some people like the two tone "dig or not" mode. Others like hearing more audio information. I happen to be in the group that likes to hear as much information as I can, without inhibiting my ability to separate and decipher each tone. That is why the number of tones I chose to hunt with is dependent on the amount and type of targets I must monitor with each sweep of the coil. Having the option to audibly monitor either the ferrous properties or the conductive properties allows me to choose the mode that requires the least amount of “meter watching“. My personal choice…? an abundance of ferrous targets = ferrous mode with two audio tones. An abundance of conductive targets = conductive mode with multiple audio tones. Your choices may vary, depending on your familiarity with the E-TRAC metal detector and the type of hunting you do.
I hope this unlocks the mystery surrounding the use of TTF on the E-TRAC. If you study the functionality of the E-TRAC, you’ll see that it is no mystery at all. It’s not for everyone nor is it for every site. But if you hunt old sites with lots of iron trash and haven‘t tried it, I encourage you to give it a shot. You may be surprised at how detecting with an open screen in TTF can increase your number of good finds.
Randy Horton (Digger)
You'll never know for sure......unless you dig it!
Comments
Fundamentally the speed that the signal is processed in the E-TRAC is unchanged irrespective of discrimination pattern or tone mapping. The bulk of the processing time is consumed by filtering the raw channels, calculating the Ferrous and Conductivity values, removing the effects of ground etc. Things like discrimination pattern and tone mapping just force the E-TRAC to make some fairly simple decisions based on the results of some complex calculations.
It is possible however that changing those settings may change the way that the audio sounds and so appear to be faster.