NAL-NL3 Fittings

Interesting, thanks for sharing, I think this will also make a difference for severe profound user’s, but it’s hardly a “wow” factor, obviously some people will end up with different results, but after reading the marketing blurb about this new formula people would expect more..

Thanks!

good to know it’s being used.

I hope my hearing instrument specialist is using it. Every improvement helps.

Have Canadians…Toronto…had it installed?

DaveL

Just west of Toronto Airport (Pearson)

It seems you had REM in MedRx devices? Thanks for sharing!

@DaveL said:

Have Canadians…Toronto…had it installed?

I think most devices will have it installed in 2026 with exception of MedRx REM devices. I didn’t see NAL-NL3 option in Phonak Target software.

Dave. I’ve plugged your audiogram into NL2 vs NL3. Your NL2 program is essentially the same as the NL3 “comfort in noise” module. The NL3 default curves add a couple dBs of gain to your targets in the speech frequencies, especially in the 3-4 kHz range. I don’t think there would be a big difference.

https://imgur.com/a/g1HQ6HP23

Yep, that’s the impression I got after watching the YouTube of the NL3 fitting formula some months back. But it did also suggest that the Speech In Noise would be improved markedly for most, even people like me with mild hearing loss. I’ll be willing to try if given the opportunity.

I hope it helps. I honestly think they did these modules, which they use AI to analize and predict, to give them flexibility going forward. I think we’ll see a paradigm shift over the next decade in which speech in noise becomes almost perfect (within the limits of physics). That’s because, with a closed fitting, AI will eventually be able to ferret out speech from the most complex environments, making hearing aid users have almost super-human speech discrimination. So much so that many people without hearing or understanding issues will wear them in certain situations. I imagine if you strapped a macbook pro onto your back, coupled to your ears with some receivers, this is already possible with the right programming and mics.

@DrJimmyJoeJimbob said:

I imagine if you strapped a macbook pro onto your back, coupled to your ears with some receivers, this is already possible with the right programming and mics.

Ha ha I can visualize this!

Best ha for speech in my opinion are Oticon or Jabra Pro 30 as they amplify the high frequencies best.

Hello @DrJimmyJoeJimbob, can you run the same for my audiogram? I’m curious how to goes and how it compares to what Oticon Genie 2 auto generates for my NAL-NL2.

Thank you.

Bruno_Marques: I think the common theme is that the NAL-NL2 curves more closely resemble the NL3 “comfort in noise” modules.

The key features in your audiogram in the NL2 vs NL3 base program seem to be the following:

1. Less gain and more compression (more separation from 80,65,50 dB inputs) at 125 kHz in NL3. This seems to be the case with everyone’s programming.
2. A less concave curve on the left side of the rise in NL3. That is, a more linear, steeper rise in gain in the 500 to 1.5 kHz region.
3. A few dB higher gain at the peak in the 2-4 kHz region in NL3.
4. Less compression in NL3 after 2 kHz (less separation from 80,65,50 dB inputs)
5. Faster roll off of gain between 6-8 kHz in NL3