Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Phonak 6.0 S versus M receiver

18 replies813 viewsLast reply

Link to this topic
Reply

Other than possible small ears, is there any benefit to using a Phonak 6.0 S receiver versus M if one is within the fitting range for both? The frequency response seems close on paper. I recall some prefer the the Demant miniFit 60dB receiver over the 85dB receiver so possibly Phonak has a similar pattern?

6 people in this conversation3 min readJump to latest

I don’t even know why they bother with the standard, Medium covers more and you’ll always be able to have the extra gains if needed in the future.

One reason might be that they have more space available for venting molds with the physically smaller standard?

Pure speculation but it’s possible the S has less “floor noise” than the M. If so and one has really good low frequency hearing and only a mild loss the S might be more pleasant.

Actually I found the S was tinny, no matter how much adjustments I did, as soon as I went medium it was “fuller” if that makes sense, but my hearing isn’t mild!

In reply to @MDB

Today I began to use UP receiver with cShell with 0.9mm vent (it seem that Phonak can’t make ordered 0.6mm) and I hear NO floor noise despite my normal low frequency .

@user490 , I would go to more powerful receivers. Historically, lower powered receivers has broader frequency response, but today, these differences are slowly fading away.

More powerful receivers gives you a better chance of coping with speech in noisy environments. See the articles below about hearing in noise despite advantageous +15 :

New to hearing aids and this forum questions on Phonak receivers, domes
Additional thoughts: These articles emphasize the important role of a sufficiently high MPO, especially when hearing in noise. Note that theemphasize the important role of a sufficiently high MPO, especially when hearing in noise. Note that the first article presents a situation with an SNR of +15 dB speech in noise, so quite favorable, but with too weak receiver intelligibity can be poor.

Are those articles still meaningful even though the maximum output is pretty close with these Sphere receivers?

For Sphere

S Receiver Maximum 112 dBSPL, 107 dBSPL
M Receiver Maximum 114 dBSPL, HFA 110 dBSPL

I could see it mattering more when the gap is larger. Comparing Sphere to Virto R, Virto R has not only a 7000 Hz maximum but also a reduced .

S Receiver is not available
M Receiver Maximum 109 dBSPL, HFA 103 dBSPL

In reply to @Bimodal_user

No offense but I wouldn’t call your low frequency hearing “normal.” 500 Hz is very good but it drops off dramatically. I stated I was speculating. Many people seem overly confident in their recommendations.

Small ears (rare). -10 thresholds out into extended highs who are using hearing aids for something other than traditional hearing loss (even more rare).

That’s it. M is better for the majority, fuller streaming sound too.

In reply to @MDB

@MDB said:

I stated I was speculating.

I didn’t want to dispute that issue, noise floor is a real thing. What I wanted to communicate is that noise floor is sometimes milder than people expected. I theoretically should hear UP floor noise much, because of differences between mine and 50 losses. Hence my remark.

@MDB said:

No offense but I wouldn’t call your low frequency hearing “normal.” 500 Hz is very good but it drops off dramatically.

Nothing offensive. I have still habit from music, where I don’t feel 500 Hz as “low”. Audiologically I classified (maybe wrongly) to max around 750 Hz. Further, from around 1000 to ~4000 Hz I consider(ed) it as mids, etc.

What you’re describing sounds like noise coming through the hearing aid microphones. Floor noise is the noise the hearing aid makes.

Edited

They are trial aids so perhaps something is wrong with one of them. Not sure as I am new to these aids. I read the mic can sometimes add noise but perhaps that is different than the receiver adding noise.

Edited

In reply to @user490

@user490 said:

For Sphere

S Receiver Maximum 112 dBSPL, HFA 107 dBSPL
M Receiver Maximum 114 dBSPL, HFA 110 dBSPL

I could see it mattering more when the gap is larger.

A few decibels is significant. IIRC, every 3 difference means 2x more power of sound.

In addition, the larger receivers are probably more stable and durable in more demanding sound situations, but that issue is my guess.

Unless the increase in power helps at levels not near the max, it seems this may depend on the hearing loss? Those with more mild loss might not need or want to hit these limits. As hearing loss increases then this issue becomes more relevant?

There are peaks in the speech, so having not so low helps much with speech in noise, because of better hearing of that peaks.

@user490 said:

As hearing loss increases then this issue becomes more relevant?

Hearing loss isn’t tonal only. Two different people with the same tonal audiogram hearing loss can have different or score.

Edited

There is another interesting input from the professional:

Phonak Bluetooth voice rattle
The MPO (maximum power output) puts a soft limit on the output. If the aid is going into saturation - full output - with over amplified speech, it’s either hitting a hard limit (the physical output of the receiver) or a software limit from the output limiting compression on the chip/feedback manager. Whichever way, it’s going to sound rubbish.

The M receiver is harder to be saturated than S.

Related discussions