Is there any difference in the antenna/core of the xEM, NExT and xMagic?
My xEM is semi deep (cant see it when I move) and it reads amazing every time.
My NExT was about the same, read pretty great, but slightly less foolproof as the xEM (I always put it on the install)
My xMagic is installed pretty shallow and itâs finicky as hell ⊠to the point where the flipper has a hard time read/write and reader that pick up the xEM from 1/2â away have a really hard time picking up the xMagic âŠ
So I was wondering if they had the same antenna or theyâre just different enough to not quite work in the same manner? ⊠Or is it just me being impatient
Both my NExT and xMagic are installed at what I would personay consider a medium depth, just deep enough to not see easily when the skin is stretched.
Neither is finicky with anything LF, and in fact have worked with everything that I have tried them with (given the correct frequency). However, it is worth noting that I get slightly more consistent reads with the xMagic. Both will read from a PM3 Easy maybe 5mm away, but when touching and as perfectly positioned as I can manage, I can get a read 19/20 times with the xMagic and maybe 17/20 times with the NExT.
It is worth noting that my NExT is under thicker skin (left wrist alongside Ulnar), so I think this variable explains the differences Iâve seen in my implants.
(Also, location of my NExT is lovely, I rate it 4 stars if anyone has already filled all of their P0-P4s)
The xEM has a full length ferrite core while the dual frequency tags have a âstubbyâ ferrite core for the T5577 side. It does affect performance slightly.
Long story short, I boiled my flux over the side of the crucible and it ate everything up. Half the bottom and that one side basically punched right through the kaowool liner. Gonna be a God Awful Mess to clear out.
Iâm personally not a fan of âin the future this, in the future thatâ stuff.
Those who are actually working on building cool stuff, who are finding ways to do things better for the sake of the intellectual challenge, those who are actually original and are creating stuff are the people building the future.
The future is slowly being built by the choices that me make in the present. So choose wisely. and buy more implants
Predicting things by the seat of the pants doesnât add much IMHO.
Carrier frequency has nothing to do with available bandwidth. Bandwidth is directly related to bandwidth, so the faster you want to transmit, the bigger the chunk of the spectrum that you require. The relationship between maximum data transfer bandwidth and RF bandwidth is defined by the ShannonâHartley theorem.
But as expected, Amal is right and that magnetometer thing will pick up a lot of crap from the environment⊠In fact, you can play around with a plain old compass and itâll be affected by things like rebar, screws, nails, furniture parts, some keychains, etcâŠ
And you are indeed correct about the size of the required antenna for low frequency stuff.
Itâs also worth mentioning that some metal detectors tend to struggle with iron as it has a higher resistance than other more valuable metals and this makes inducing eddy currents a bit harder. And IIRC, some metal detectors use the phase of the returned signal or something along those lines to avoid detecting ferromagnetic metals as stuff made out of iron is rarely valuable.
Besides, just like Amal said, small bits of metal are very hard to detect.
The last standing building associated with the original American Bantam Car Company in Butler, Pennsylvania, is being shut down and is set for demolition following a recent fire
I wouldnât say ânothing to do withâ.. they are strongly correlated for many reasons.
After further research and in an effort to deobfuscate, âbandwidthâ as I mean throughput is actually called âChannel capacityâ in RF terminology.
I tried to convey the whole 4Hz + 20mHz part, but ended up removing it in one of my many proofreading attempts.
But TBH, youâre not going to transmit a 4Hz signal anytime soon.
In AM, the amplitude variations will create the sidebands. So itâs not a single frequency at the end of the day and Joseph Fourier is probably laughing at both of us from his graveâŠ
For it to be a true single frequency, it would have to be a perfect sine with no variations in phase, amplitude, or frequency.
Quadrature Amplitude Modulation is the most commonly used one for digital systems now, and itâs sort of a mix between AM and FM. Itâs technically amplitude and phase, not amplitude and frequency. But you can think of the frequency in FM as the derivative of the phase.
I mentioned this because thereâs a lot of misinformation about wireless systems being better because of higher carrier frequencies. While the actual gain in performance is due to the increased available bandwidth on the higher bands. On paper, 2.4GHz WiFi can be just as good as the 5.8GHz counterparts, but in reality, thereâs a lot more crap at the lower frequency.
Although at the end of the day, Iâm just being an annoying engineer who missed the forrest for the trees while trying to avoid looking at the craziness.
Thread 
!
