Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Oticon Real Question

This topic is closed.

24 replies956 viewsLast reply

Jump
Link to this topic

Would anyone like to help me with a (hypothetical) question.
If your budget doesn’t stretch to Oticon Real 1 would the next best alternative be to go down to a Real 2 (or 3); or would the top tier of an earlier model be better (say Opn S1)
Or to put it another way: Is the bottom tier of today’s model better than the top tier of yesterday’s model? (From the point of view of quality of hearing and not just more bells and whistles)
Thanks

8 people in this conversation8 min readJump to latest

The previous generation is not Opn S, in fact it’s more 1. The difference between Real and More , is the sudden sound and handling noise reduction along with the wind. For the most part of the instrument are very similar. I would go as far a saying Real is a tad better.

I think Real 3 is a quite solid instrument, I have people tried level 2 and 3 couldn’t notice
really a difference.

I would also Note, that if you are talking about OPN S- it Is discontinued ONLY the Opn S PP is available. If the budget is tight, HIGHLY recommend Jet PX1- for the $$ you can’t find any other instrument which performs that well.

In terms of hearing quality, some core performances of current low-end hearing aids (such as chips, noise reduction, bandwidth, etc.) may be better than those of past high-end models, but not all low-end products have this advantage.

Technological advances have made new low-end models more accurate in sound processing, while old high-end models have limitations in adaptability to complex environments and durability due to technological differences.

When purchasing, those with limited budgets or mild to moderate hearing loss should give priority to new low-end models, while those with severe hearing loss or special needs can consider old high-end models in good condition.

For Oticon in particular an Oticon More 1 would be better than an Oticon Intent 3 or Real 3 if you want the best performance in noise.

Oticon are very good at differentiating the performance tiers for their products. Some basic features such as what they call “true dynamics” (a wide input dynamic range) that are available across all technology tiers across other manufacturers portfolios are not available outside the top 2 tiers of Oticon products.

Without a wide input dynamic range sound levels will saturate in very noisy environments introducing distortion and limiting the separation of speech in noise in very loud environments.

It is for this reason that I don’t recommend Oticon devices below tier 2 for most clients.

In reply to @Gilbert

@Gilbert said:

It seems that the later models are to be preferred even at a lower tech level.

I’m not an audioligist, but just looking at your I’d say you are most likely in need of a high tech level to get the most out of the hearing you still have.
That’s just my amateur opinion.
You’re in Canada, and they do have Costco stores, which carry name brand aids, rebranded for much less $$ than the Real 1.
The Philips 9050 is manufactured by Demant, which is Oticon’s parent company, and it shares some characteristics of other Demant brands.
The only problem with Costco, is finding a fitter experienced enough to give you a good outcome, but they do exist.

In reply to @Hearing_Potential

Thanks for all your opinions. It seems to boil down to the fact that the higher tech levels are better in speech in noise but not necessrily better at general hearing in quieter situations. Since I don’t really need speech in noise very much, I am thinking that the lower tech level would be OK. But I should go for the later models in a lower tech level.

I would always recommend the highest level of technology that is affordable for you. A lot of users aren’t in difficult listening situations all the time, but when they are they are often very important situations like funerals or larger gatherings that have a lot of meaning. It can be very frustrating when you don’t hear well in the most important event for the month.

If you’re looking for a more cost effective option that delivers good all around-performance you might consider a non-premium brand. Oticon and Phonak have great top-tier technology but you can often get better value for money from other brands that aren’t necessarily considered “premium.” For example, Unitron devices are designed in Ontario and offer a more competitive feature set than Phonak at the same technology level. You can also upgrade your tech level within their devices after purchase and even trial a higher tech level in the real world before upgrading.

@Hearing_Potential said:

I would always recommend the highest level of technology that is affordable for you.

Absolutely, and this is why Costco is the only real option, they don’t play games with you, it’s premium or nothing, just like it should be everywhere.

Edited

If success depended solely on the technology level of the product this would be correct.

However, your clinician plays an important role in the process and if your local Costco doesn’t have a top quality one that you have easy access to it may not be the best option for you.

I don’t agree that premium technology is always the best. There is a price to pay for
increasing numbers of channels in a multichannel hearing aid which is spectral distortion at the edges of each filter in a filterbank. This can actually degrade speech understanding.

Some of my paediatric users with sensorineural loss reported hearing worse when switching from a 6 to a 16 channel hearing aid for this reason.

For a conductive hearing loss you want to minimise this kind of distortion. It’s about finding the right solution for each individual client.

@Hearing_Potential said:

If success depended solely on the technology level of the product this would be correct

Same thing for useless lower end products?

@Hearing_Potential said:

However, your clinician plays an important role in the process and if your local Costco doesn’t have a top quality one that you have easy access to it may not be the best option for you

Ha, you can say exactly the same for any other clinic, some are better then other’s, the good thing is if you buy premium from Costco your only out $1600 instead of the 5 to 8k or even more!

@Hearing_Potential said:

I don’t agree that premium technology is always the best

Hmmmm, yeah but better to have premium over the crippled lower end products that sell for more then what Costco sell premium, you do know that you can actually adjust all the features right, so you don’t have to have everything cranked up, you could program to near lower end, as for channels or not being a factor in determining ones suitability for hearing aid is a moot point, one that 99% of people aren’t going to care, sorry I can’t comment on paediatric patients but I’d take your word there’s issues there.

@Hearing_Potential said:

It’s about finding the right solution for each individual client

Yes absolutely, but the customer should have the final say on this tho.

I’m happy to see you concede that Costco isn’t “the only real option.” :blush: The state of audiology professional practice in the USA is highly variable which is a shame, but it just means it’s even more important to find a professional who follows best practices and not just another salesperson.

Premium tech isn’t necessarily the best suitable option for all people, but it doesn’t mean that most couldn’t benefit from some premium tech features. Spheric speech clarity in the Phonak Infinio Sphere devices is something the OP might look into given his degree and configuration of loss and it’s not available through Costco.

Clinicians following best practices follow client-centred care. We make recommendations and provide suggested options. The client makes choices.

@Hearing_Potential said:

Clinicians following best practices follow client-centred care.

Maybe but at least in the US it’s almost always business taking priority which you don’t experience at Costco. Many audiology practices are not transparent about insurance benefits so clients can make informed choices. Even bad doctors don’t operate that way. It’s hard to represent the experience as client-centered care.

We’ve wandered a little away from the original topic here. That’s OK because discussion is always good.
To clarify my position a bit - I am a self-programmer currently using Opn S1 and I am quite satisfied with these. I now have an opportunity to acquire a pair of Real 3 at a good price. Would it really be an overall improvement to go “up” by models and “down” by tech level?

No I wouldn’t see that as an improvement, go premium top models whenever possible, you already have top level OPN 1 and you like them, stick to what you know would have a better outcome.

I tried Oticon Intent 1 and then O.Intent 2. Went back to O.I.1 Really shocked by the prices but impressed with my new hearing. I am still having trouble hearing someone right in front of me but getting good hearing listening to someone behind me. My imagination or a real thing?

Related discussions