Printable View
So I picked up a Pulse last night and I'm pretty stoked on it. Who else is rocking one? Any tips or tricks that haven't been covered in the beaconreview.com, etc?
(I'll delete this if there's another thread about the pulse, I found a lot of info about the pulse here, but no dedicated threads about it..)
I'm still torn between the DSP, S1 and Pulse.
What made you decide on the Pulse?
I love my pulse. Probably because it is what I practice with but no complaints it gets the job done.
Well, that was quick. Looks like I'm one of you guys now.
I have a pulse and a DSP. I like the glove friendly buttons on the pulse over the DSP. They're both great units, I think it comes down to personal preference. I haven't messed with the S1 before, but several people have told me the UI is confusing at times...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jer
same here. i've got both units and prefer the pulse for easier searches and the ability to go analog when needed. i know a few pro guides/ex-patrollers that have an S1 that they gave upon after a month of use. confusing signals and slow were what i've heard about it. the S1's were free to them and they gave them back.Quote:
Originally Posted by sfotex
I like the scan button on the pieps. Some times it wont flag older beacons, or give the wrong # of signals but the scan button is always on the money.
The S1 and Pulse are very similar in terms of their functionality, but vastly different in their UI. (In other words, they're capable of doing the same things, but go about it in different fashions.)
By contrast, the DSP is more of a "traditional" design (in the sense that the Tracker's at-the-time-radical design is now kind of the baseline) yet with signal separation and marking/masking. I've also found the beacon count & marking/masking to be less reliable than with the S1 and Pulse, a disparity that becomes more pronounced when searching for old F1 beacons.
(Hah, that took me only four sentences, as opposed to the several pages I'm working on right now for the same thing!)
FYI I had both the Pulse and the DSP out during some beacon practice over the weekend. During a proximity multiple burial, the Pulse became confused between the two signals and was not able to switch from one to the next. The DSP handled the situation perfectly. This was without using the mark function. We had a fleet of Pulses and they all reflected the same problem; only one DSP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jer
I own both, they are both very solid beacons, upside of the Pulse is that you don't need to hunt out firmware upgrades (though there is one coming in 2009, that basically allows a 'simple' mode and updates a few things). The Pulse can also default to analogue mode and it has the heartbeat monitor. That said, the DSP has a slightly longer range and better management of multiple burials.
I am confused as to this confusion. Do you mean the Pulse did not display both signals? Was not able to mark one? Or...Quote:
Originally Posted by khyber.pass
The DSP firmware upgrades are always posted at LibertyMountain.com once available.Quote:
Originally Posted by khyber.pass
Pulse firmware has been upgraded twice in the two years since its introduction:
http://www.mammut.ch/en/avalancheres...ryvox_faq.html
^^ Sorry for not being more clear. The Pulse showed two beacons. It led the searchers toward one ok. But then moving away from that beacon, it was unable to distinguish a second signal *even when standing on top of the 2nd beacon*.
By contrast, the DSP showed two beacons and led me to the first one. Moving away from beacon 1 it switched to beacon 2's signal at about 20 metres and honed in on the new signal.
The two beacons were about 40 metres apart.
So was it like this:
- two targets, about 40m apart from each other
- Pulse initially shows two victims
- searcher goes to first beacon and marks it
- now the second beacon's signal disappears?
^^ Not quite, as we weren't using the mark function (on purpose, to make things more interesting). So:
- two targets, about 40m apart from each other
- Pulse initially shows two victims
- searcher goes to B1
- searcher walks away from B1
- keeps walking
- 40m away, actually standing on B2 by fluke, still shows signal of 40m from B1
Pieps:
- two targets, about 40m apart from each other
- DSP initially shows two victims
- searcher goes to B1
- searcher walks away from B1
- keeps walking away, at ~25m, signal switches to B2
- searcher walks to B2
The DSP switched from B1 to B2 without marking. The Pulse was unable to 'get off' B1 signal.
Okay, so to clarify:
- Pulse always showed two beacons in its list.
- However, Pulse did not switch over when it should have to what was actually by then the closer signal (as the searcher moved from one beacon to the other).
- Searcher could have scrolled through the list to the other beacon (as well as marked the first beacon).
Is anyone else concerned about where the pulse harness keeps the beacon?
It seems that no matter how I adjust it the beacon ends up right over my heart, I feel like if I took a big impact that thing could give me cardiac arrest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greguar
mine sits either low on my abs or can be swung around to the back below the kidneys.
i'm not too worried about the motion detection being fooled by the location.
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan S.
(And yes again as I need more than 8 characters).
Besides the rad price on the Pulse, the other thing that kinda turned me off about the S1 is the flip-up. That's a big moving part and it just looks fragile to me. Damn, I gotta get down to the Big City and pick that thing up.
I think the scroll feature is a real strength of the pulse. When searching for old analog signals it provides the reliability that the mark feature doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan S.
Is anyone getting the firmware update?
I received my upgraded beacon the other week.
In brief, now allows an entirely different mode, almost kind of a DSP-esque simplified multi-burial functionality. Also some tweaks to the regular mode (including a more clear distinction between, say, "30" and "3.0").
I'll eventually update my WildSnow.com reviews, but in the meantime:
http://www.mammut.ch/en/newfirmware.html
http://www.mammut.ch/images/P_BARRY_MANUAL_EN_2009.pdf
Another update. I busted the battery box on my pulse and sent it back to Mammut, they sent me a new unit. Seems like the new unit has some ghosting issues, especially when I put it side by side with my pieps. Any ideas?
What are you using as your target beacon(s)? Ortovox F1 beacons have a tendency to cause ghosting on any signal separation beacon, although I've found it to be more pronounced on the Pieps DSP. (I haven't tested the Pulse 3.0 in this regard yet.)
And are you getting ghosting from just a single target beacon, or is that when you have multiple target beacons?
That is my biggest complaint about the S1. It was really annoying duing a mock burrial to have a giant beacon flapping around while digging fast. I never even though of this until I dug with it open.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jer
Target really wasn't anything. Basic scenario was I would turn my beacon to receive and it would pick up a signal even though nothing seemed to be nearby. I would wander around and try to lock onto something but no go. My pieps worked fine when I switched over to it. When something came online it locked on ok. My concern is that this could confuse the hell out of me when I'm trying to pick up a signal during a coarse search.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan S.
If anyone in SLC has a pulse I would be intersted in doing a side by side comparison.
If I remember correctly (I don't have my S1 in front of me right now), it is possible to jam part of an opened S1 into its pouch, so that it can still in receive yet partially secured while digging.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevenc
Hmm, interesting. That could definitely be a problem in a real search. The only "false alert" ghosting I've had like that has been with other beacon models when in close proximity (typically indoors) to various electronics. I'll try wandering around with my 3.0 Pulse to see if I catch anything...Quote:
Originally Posted by sfotex
I was stoked to get a couple Pulse's yesterday. Granted I have not yet read the detailed instruction manual, but that was part of my test...
I found a similar issue to one already posted here, which led to some confusion: When doing a close proximity (all within 20m) multiple (3 burial) search, the Pulse did not pick up the third beacon AT ALL. I could intuit the functions to find the first two (M2 & Pulse), but after marking those two the third signal (M2) never appeared, even when right on top of it. When I began to wonder what was up, it simply said STOP every time I moved an inch.
I believe it was my error, and of course I'll read the instructions in detail and try again (many times), but if something like this happened in an emergency it would be SCARY.
I know that every beacon requires practice, but it made me wonder if the "ease of use" of a new digital beacon with many features is worth the trade-off for the reliable (yet challenging) simplicity of the M2 or other analog beacons (always shows a signal if present, never gets "confused"). I like knowing that I am the one confused, and not my tools, because there's something I can do about that. Is the lower range and potential confusion/malfunction of a Pulse worth reconsidering?
I realize the goal of every beacon designer is to create the best and easiest to use tool, and that there will be a progression towards perfection within the confines of the real world (like the first cell-phones evolution to the iphone, but without the speed that such economies of scale allow). That being said, there is a tendency to make new products for reasons other than pure functionality (marketing), and I often prefer the functional designs of my older high-quality gear to the multitude of new products available each season boasting new (and relatively untested) new features.
Oh, yes, what about beacons vs. phones? Is your Pulse affected by your smartphone? It makes sense to keep it turned off (the phone) but what about in an emergency? How far from a searching (or transmitting) beacon does someone need to be to make a phonecall? Time for more practice!
I'd love to have your real-world input, and really appreciate those who are putting in time to figure this stuff out. Thank you.
I suspect that the problem you experienced is what I describe here as the "The Triangle Range Test":
http://www.wildsnow.com/1609/jonatha...on-test-notes/
The Pulse and S1 had major problems with this test last year. The DSP experiences no problems at all. I plan to conduct another round of tests with the Pulse and S1.
As for cell/iPhone/PDA causing interference for a beacon (as opposed to the other way around), I am quite confident that a beacon (whether searching or transmitting) would not cause problems with making a call.
(Now for those who are about to say, hey, what idiot would make a phone call while searching for an avy victim?, I could imagine a situation with a large number of searchers, a single victim, and close proximity to outside help. During the signal search phase, one searcher could be tasked with making a quick phone call – e.g., to the ski patrol at the adjacent nearby resort – for help with anticipated medical & extrication needs. But otherwise, yeah, if you’re making a phone call while searching for an avy victim...)
I need to try it out in a field in the middle of nowhere. There's been other crap far away, but my dps wasn't locked on (i.e. a beacon park with the pads powered off and no one else within 100 yards) It's very realistic that it's picking up something, but when I try to find 'it' I can't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan S.
TCSAR picked up a number of Pulses last year and a few S1s. We'll probably also get some DSPs this year. I spent most of the year working with the Pulse. I just want to comment on the idea above that older beacons (m1, tracker, etc) never get confused. I think this is a completely false assumption. Older beacons get confused just as easily as new (maybe more so), triple antenna beacons. But instead of telling you they were confused they just gave you bad info for a period of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by alpine.col
First, here is my understand of how and why beacons get confused as it was explained to me. Have you ever been at a stop light watching the blinkers on the cars in front of you? Each one is on a slightly different frequency but sometimes two or three will "sync" up for a blink or three, right? Each transmitting beacon has its own frequency (though all within a relatively tight range) but like those blinkers, the transmitting signals will sometimes sync up. This confuses the receiving beacon since they no longer "see" one beacon at say 20m and another at 30m. The two blur together.
With our old trackers and Barryvox 3000s we would see this confusion as rapidly shifting direction and distance measurements. The newer beacons recognize this problem and tell you to stop for a second or two. While this seems very frustrating at first, standing still for a second is much better than running off in the wrong direction which is what the older beacons tended to cause.
I know the guys at LibertyMountain are very excited to help folks experiment with different transceivers. If you are in SLC you should try to contact them.
I hear you, and don't disagree about beeps blurring together.Quote:
Originally Posted by sar13
However, I don't think that analog beacons get confused. As far as I can tell, they ALWAYS beep when they receive a signal (or two, or three signals) within range. Even if the beeps seem to blur together, they are all present, and in the amplitude corresponding to their proximity. I believe it is the human that gets confused by the accurate signals.
In the analogy to car blinkers, is the beacon equivalent to the eye? If so, can the eye still determine that there are multiple cars, each with it's own lights blinking in unison? Only if they are open. The Pulse's "Stop, Wait" screen seems equivalent to closing ones eyes until the cadences of the blinks separate again (possibly causing an accident, or at least some honking).
I think you may be referring to directional beacons, which no doubt have many benefits, but sometimes give confusing VISUALs. There is something comforting about the simplicity of the signal to NOISE function of an old analog beacon (like an F1) if used correctly (I would consider Trackers, 3000's and M2's newer, although the M2 functions more like an F1 with a digital display).
Most beacons have slightly different transmission rates, resulting in what at first sounds confusing: lots of beeps that sound out-of-sync, then they sync up, then out-of-sync again. This is useful information...
With practice, I've learned to identify an audible signal, and keep it's rhythm while I'm searching for it. If another signal comes in, I try to keep them distinguished by their cadence (first one fast/second slow etc.) or proximity (volume). Once the most prominent one is located, it's possible to follow the weaker signal while essentially ignoring the louder one, until you are far enough away from the first to clearly distinguish the second and then pinpoint it. This is done primarily by sound, as directional arrows can be confusing, especially when they are bouncing in multiple directions.
It gets more challenging (but not impossible) with three or more burials in close proximity, and is why I got a Pulse (I want to try the S1 and DSP as well). I see that there are many benefits to the new technology, and I want to practice with it and understand how it works. I'm just not sure if I like it yet. That it didn't pick up the third signal at all (or at least didn't beep), and then essentially froze, is what really bothered me.
Thanks for reading.
And thanks for the test notes link, Jonathan, I'll have to dig in deeper...
Yes, very true. As a certain beacon company's U.S. head has said, “Much of beacon design boils down to how much of your thinking do you want your beacon to do for you.” With an analog beacon, all the electronics are doing is allowing your human ear to listen in on the otherwise inaccessible frequency for the beeps. Get confused? It's your fault! But with any beacon that has digital processing, now the beacon can get confused -- which will of course get you confused too....Quote:
Originally Posted by alpine.col
Anyone have the new firmware upgrade? Any noticeable improvements?
For a (very) quick summary, copied below is the intro to my draft blog update of this:
http://www.wildsnow.com/1729/barryvo...beacon-review/
I can email the complete file too.
*****
Mammut Barryvox Pulse: Firmware 3.0 Update
http://www.mammut.ch/images/P_BARRY_MANUAL_EN_2009.pdf
http://www.mammut.ch/en/avalancheres...ryvox_faq.html
The Pulse is an amazing technological tour de force – and now with a “Basic” user profile option under the 3.0 firmware to harness those capabilities in a more idiot-proof manner for the user who is, well, I’ll let you the dear reader complete that sentence as you wish! The Ortovox S1 shares most of the Pulse’s impressive capabilities, albeit with a radically different user interface. (If you’re potentially interested in the Pulse, you should also look into the S1, and vice versa.) The Pulse in its “Advanced” user profile continues to offer a high degree of customization. Both user profiles have a host of various improvements sprinkled throughout their various functions, as summarized here:
http://www.mammut.ch/en/newfirmware.html
I accept with information: The S1 and Pulse are very similar in terms of their functionality, but vastly different in their UI.
By contrast, the DSP is more of a "traditional" design in the sense that the Tracker's at-the-time-radical design is now kind of the baseline yet with signal separation and marking/masking.
Right, that's exactly what I wrote in my prior post:Quote:
Originally Posted by hadpontry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan S.
I had a realization yesterday. When we move to NY, Im going to have to get rid of a LOT. Ive got a year, so Im gunna begin going through things now and getting it all together in a box to sell before we leave. I have a small yard sale collection going right now. Lordy...I have a massive job in front of me.
I agree, the pulse is a huge improvement on what has been out there. We use the pulse as the client issued transceiver in a Cat operation up here in Canada, and the ease with which clients pick up the basics is amazing. Not idiot proof, but certainly a long way there. What I do find annoying is having to send the unit in to get the firmware upgraded. Do you know if there is a charge for this (my unit is 6 months old)? Wish there was some way to do this via my computer!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan S.
Another great site that reviews transceivers and provides some great info is:
www.beaconreviews.com well worth a visit!!