Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Phonak nano CIC

This topic is closed.

17 replies15.3k viewsLast reply

Link to this topic

I am a first time H/A user. In February I was fitted for a H/A and told that Phonak had a new model called the Ambra Nano. An injection mold was made and I received my Phonak’s in a few days. I am sure that I went through the same awkward learning curve as anyone getting used to the hollow sound of your own voice etc, but all in all I could hear things much better. About a month ago the cover for the microphone inlet came off so I took it in and it was repaired and returned in about 3 days. This morning, the little nylon handle broke on the other H/A so I find myself once again headed to the audiologist to have the H/A repaired. This is very inconvenient and I also don’t like being without my H/A time and time again because I depend on them now for my many meetings that I have throuout the work day. Is it normal to have these equipment problems within a few months on a new unit? After finding this forum, it seems like Phonak does not seem to get rave reviews and doesn’t seem like most people’s top pick. Advice?
Thank you in advance

8 people in this conversation8 min readJump to latest

Hi Hank,

Generally speaking Phonak are one of the best in the business. Certainly, in my experience I have been prescribed Phonaks by the majority of audiologists that I have used (including 3 privately and 1 NHS) in the last 20 years. The only exception to that was the NHS (in two different areas), where Oticons were supplied.

I think the problem here, and you will see this mentioned on threads, is of the reliability of smaller hearing aids, in particular aids. These aids tend to get sent back for repair much more so than or aids.

I wear Phonak Petite CIC aids (Solana), and touch wood, I have had no problems so far after 4 months use. However, I used to wear aids, and I did have some problems with those, which caused them to be sent back for repair several times. Some of these problems were down to not maintaining them properly - I underestimated the problems with wax and did not change the wax traps frequently enough.

I would recommend speaking to your audiologist and ask him/her to speak to a phonak rep to see if there is a problem with reliability with the nanos.

I highly doubt that the rep is going to come out and say they are having a problem. You would be better off asking your audiologist if other patients using the nano are having similar problems and if the answer is yes, switch to a different type of HA or buy a second pair for when the first pair are in for repairs. Good luck!

Since June, I have used the Micro Tech brand of Starkey aids. Starkey is a major hearing aid manufacturer like Phonak is.

In June, I got style aids since I have previously had aids for 7 years from another vendor. I had to send each aid in twiece for receiver (speaker) repairs even thought I kept then clean & the wax trap changed.

In February, Starkey agreed to let me send the aids back for credit toward some aids.With the RIC aids, I will not need to send them back if the receiver fails because the receiver is a standard part. So far, they have been more reliable.

ITC and CIC aids generally need to be sent out for repair due to their custom shells.

I appreciate the responses. Since my original post I received my Phonak Nano’s with the handles repaired in 6 days. I wore them 2 days and the same microphone cover that originally came off and was repaired, came off again. This time it didn’t come off in my hand like the first time so I have no idea when it broke. Now I have to bring my hearing aid in again. I am very cautious with my hearing aids and not rough with them at all. The frequency of needed repairs seems extreme to me.
I am seeking advice of the experienced here. Should I demand a new pair, different brand, a refund or different style? Something needs to be done because breaking and returning every few weeks is not acceptable to me. Opinions please!

Edited

Nano/Micro have higher failure rate than other aids, but there’s a bit of luck involved and a bit of a light touch when it comes to handling.

We have a symptom that I call ‘farmers fingers’ essentially when people have worked outside or in more physical jobs, their finger tips de-sensitise and harden. Micro CIC handling is a particular issue for this kind of customer. It leads to shell fractures, battery door failures and insertion issues more than other groups. Even over-enthusiastic ‘cleaning’ can result in things going awry.

This very morning I’ve moved a long term customer away from a CIC to a slim tube micro-, simply because he found the CIC would fail too often. He owns a company that builds large steel framed sheds. He had previously been on a small BTE aid, but had wanted to ‘go-smaller’ (despite advice against) to get an aid that didn’t interfere with his glasses. It’s been a fairly costly couple of years as a result.

@Um_bongo said:

Nano/Micro CIC have higher failure rate than other aids, but there’s a bit of luck involved and a bit of a light touch when it comes to handling.

We have a symptom that I call ‘farmers fingers’ essentially when people have worked outside or in more physical jobs, their finger tips de-sensitise and harden. Micro CIC handling is a particular issue for this kind of customer. It leads to shell fractures, battery door failures and insertion issues more than other groups. Even over-enthusiastic ‘cleaning’ can result in things going awry.

This very morning I’ve moved a long term customer away from a CIC to a slim tube micro-BTE, simply because he found the CIC would fail too often. He owns a company that builds large steel framed sheds. He had previously been on a small BTE aid, but had wanted to ‘go-smaller’ (despite advice against) to get an aid that didn’t interfere with his glasses. It’s been a fairly costly couple of years as a result.

The “farmers fingers” is an interesting term. I am a Bricklayer, however I have not worked in the field for many years and as I stated in my post, I do believe that I have been very gentle with the Phonak’s. Is there an equivilent from another manufacturer? I was told by my audiologist that the Phonak nano is the smallest CIC that there is.
Thank you

In reply to @Hank

@Hank said:

The “farmers fingers” is an interesting term. I am a Bricklayer, however I have not worked in the field for many years and as I stated in my post, I do believe that I have been very gentle with the Phonak’s. Is there an equivilent CIC from another manufacturer? I was told by my audiologist that the Phonak nano is the smallest CIC that there is.
Thank you

Your audiologist wasn’t being completely honest there. The Soundlens used the same technology and has been out for a while: due to Starkey customising the face-plate, it has a smaller frontal cross section. There’s also the Oticon intigia and the Unitron micro.

Oticon have traditionally made robust , I have had some issues with shell failures on the soundlens and the Unitron is essentially a clone of what you are wearing.

I’m more concerned that you might not be a suitable candidate given your occupation, my criteria above was a bit of a generalisation; but litlle aids won’t do well with lots of wax and sweat. Some people can get away with it, others cannot.

@Um_bongo said:

Your audiologist wasn’t being completely honest there. The Soundlens used the same technology and has been out for a while: due to Starkey customising the face-plate, it has a smaller frontal cross section. There’s also the Oticon intigia IIC and the Unitron micro.

Oticon have traditionally made robust ITE, I have had some issues with shell failures on the soundlens and the Unitron is essentially a clone of what you are wearing.

I’m more concerned that you might not be a suitable candidate given your occupation, my criteria above was a bit of a generalisation; but litlle aids won’t do well with lots of wax and sweat. Some people can get away with it, others cannot.

I probably wasn’t specific enough. I no longer work in the field. I have a desk job now so I don’t think that sweat will be an issue. However, the audiologist did not ask me about wax. I have a lot of ear wax. I don’t think that either of those have been contributing factors in the twice broken microphone cover or broken handle problems that I have had.

I paid a lot of money for these H/A and I really don’t have the time to be returning them every few weeks for repair, not to mention the fact that when they are being repaired I have a hard time hearing people in meetings which is why I got the H/A in the first place.

@Hank said:

I probably wasn’t specific enough. I no longer work in the field. I have a desk job now so I don’t think that sweat will be an issue. However, the audiologist did not ask me about wax. I have a lot of ear wax. I don’t think that either of those have been contributing factors in the twice broken microphone cover or broken handle problems that I have had.

I paid a lot of money for these CIC H/A and I really don’t have the time to be returning them every few weeks for repair, not to mention the fact that when they are being repaired I have a hard time hearing people in meetings which is why I got the H/A in the first place.

You have a couple of options. Buy a couple of pairs of cheaper aids and keep a set of spares with you or just go for a more robust or larger aid.

In reply to @Hank

I’d say the wax issue is more of a concern when looking at ’s…I’d expect them to go back more frequently for folks with wax problems than those without…which says a lot since CIC’s tend to need more frequent repairs than other ’s in general anyway. As for the mic covers, they should be able to have those in the office for replacement - I know I have a little bag of them and can just glue one on when one falls off. Honestly, you don’t need the mic cover anyway…just be a little more diligent at cleaning at night paying special attention to the mic area. As for the removal line coming off - I have seen this only a handful of times in the 14 years I’ve been practicing (but I’ve done lots of ’s so that might be why). It’s a simple fix, and also one that can be done in the office to be honest. Sometimes the glue dries out or there just wasn’t enough used in the first place to keep it there.

The Nano is fairly new and they might just still be working through some of the glitches sometimes seen with new products. I’d have your pro say something to Phonak when you send it in and specify that this is a real issue for you and if it happens again you may go to a different .

Edited

I had a hissing sound without the cover. I thought at first the battery was going so the cover must be nessecary on the the nanos.

It appears that I am getting some real expert opinions here from Doctors or Audiologists and I really appreciate it. I havent read as many positive things about Phonak on the Forum as I have other brand ’s. Is it all personal opinion such as Ford vs Chevy?

Lastly, if I keep having breakage issues am I well within my rights to demand a different pair of ’s (or my $$ back) from a different manufacturer or am I at the mercy of the audiologist? I would think for $6800 that my satisfaction should be imparitive. The CIC’s do improve my hearing considerably however if I continue to have problems do the style HA’s have less problems?

In reply to @DocAudio

@DocAudio said:

I’d say the wax issue is more of a concern when looking at CIC’s…I’d expect them to go back more frequently for folks with wax problems than those without…which says a lot since CIC’s tend to need more frequent repairs than other HA’s in general anyway. As for the mic covers, they should be able to have those in the office for replacement - I know I have a little bag of them and can just glue one on when one falls off. Honestly, you don’t need the mic cover anyway…just be a little more diligent at cleaning at night paying special attention to the mic area. As for the removal line coming off - I have seen this only a handful of times in the 14 years I’ve been practicing (but I’ve done lots of BTE’s so that might be why). It’s a simple fix, and also one that can be done in the office to be honest. Sometimes the glue dries out or there just wasn’t enough used in the first place to keep it there.

The Nano is fairly new and they might just still be working through some of the glitches sometimes seen with new products. I’d have your pro say something to Phonak when you send it in and specify that this is a real issue for you and if it happens again you may go to a different IIC.

Agreed on the wax, it’s always the same culprits too.

Please tell me you don’t use cyanacrylate adhesive for this…

@Um_bongo said:

Agreed on the wax, it’s always the same culprits too.

Please tell me you don’t use cyanacrylate adhesive for this…

I for sure dont use cyanacrylate adhesive because I have no idea what it is. I just use Q-Tips.

In reply to @Um_bongo

First time user (of and this forum). Saw some mentions of microphone cover loss on the Nanos and wanted to comment. Have had Nanos for about 5 weeks, and just lost a cover myself.
Appears to me there might be a flaw in the design of the battery door. It might actually stop fully open against the microphone cover, and apply quite a bit of lateral force on the cover as it touches obliquely. A very slight force on the fully open door applies a relatively large force on the cover because of the lever created.
Be very careful when handling the nano with the door open as this may be the vulnerable time for the covers. I might try and add some little glue stops on the door if Phonak does not have a solution.

RobS, after losing a cover on each of my nano’s, and a handle on one within a period of a few months I convinced my audiologist that my nano’s were flawed and Phonak replaced them. I have not had any problems since.

Active discussions

What the forum has been talking about this week.