When I selected my brand of hearing aid, I was not given the choice of selecting the in-ear receiver. I’m pretty sure i wasnt given the receivers that came with the hearing aids because a number of different length wires were tried to get them to fit properly. It would seem to me that this little “loudspeaker” would be a very important component in the hearing aid system. With audio earbuds, there are levels of quality. You can buy a five dollar pair, or a three hundred dollar pair. Are there levels of quality in hearing aid receivers?
When I selected my brand of hearing aid, I was not given the choice of selecting the in-ear receiver. I’m pretty sure i wasnt given the receivers that came with the hearing aids because a number of different length wires were tried to get them to fit properly. It would seem to me that this little “loudspeaker” would be a very important component in the hearing aid system. With audio earbuds, there are levels of quality. You can buy a five dollar pair, or a three hundred dollar pair. Are there levels of quality in hearing aid receivers?
The receiver is really a separate component so even if it was bundled together, there is not really one receiver that comes with it. Usually there are receiver choices based on output, like normal, power, high power, ultra power, and, there are different lengths of wire to fit your ear. So there are some choices but it doesn’t mean there are differences in quality. Your pro will select the power option that fits your hearing loss and the wire length that fits your ear.
They usually come in three different powers to fit your hearing loss. A low power for mild hearing loss. A medium power for moderate hearing loss and a high power (usually called power receiver) for severe hearing loss. The lower power receivers have less distortion so it’s best not to exceed your needs. They also come in 4 or 5 different lengths to fit small ears and big ears. Here’s an >>example159<<.
And $350 is not too far off the price some Audis charge for these
Folks got a bit giddy because what you describe is an fitter whose in it to milk you for all they can. I’ve had two receivers replace at no charge. Aids come with a warranty that covers them along with the shell component. They are all alike in that there is no good-better-best. The receivers have 3-4 level that address the severity of the clients loss. There are seller of receivers on Ebay but they are for people who don’t have aids in warranty – usually bought used.
usually you can’t mix receivers with brands, there’s brand spezific receivers which only work on a specific model. There’s no audiophile receiver, they only differ in power lvl.
Folks got a bit giddy because what you describe is an fitter whose in it to milk you for all they can…
Ok, thanks. I’m sorry if I worded my question to cause confusion. It’s my unfamiliarity perhaps with the hearing aid components. What you’re describing couldn’t be farther from my experience with my COSTCO fitter. I’m actually on my second pair of receivers which were replaced at no charge, along with a handful of battery cards. My right hearing aid distorts at peak voices or sounds and needs to be looked at. I was merely wondering if it’s possible to have say… the Mark Levinson of hearing aids mated to the Radio Shack of in ear receivers.
Receivers are brand-specific. So besides the power level – which is based on your – and the wire length – which is based on your anatomy – you don’t get a choice. And, as far as I can tell, it’s the processing (and your trashed hearing) that limits the quality, not the receiver.
As a person new to this part of life I might have asked the same question as the original poster.
i have learned a lot by reading the multitude of posts on this site. In particular I have learned who to ignore and who gives
decent, level headed advise.
What is the difference between a 2S and a 2M receiver? My Costco fitter replaced one recently because I was having problems, and I just discovered that the replacement is a 2M; originally both were 2S; now one is 2S the other is 2M.
You need to say what brand of hearing aid. Each brand names/codes their receivers differently. For example here’s a link to a Phonak >>Length=2, strength=P for Power60<<.
The 2S receiver is the standard, lowest power receiver. The 2M is the medium power receiver. I wasn’t aware that one could mix and match, but I’m a complete newby.If you look at the datasheet for the Kirkland Signature 7.0, it will show the fitting curves for the S, M, P and HP receivers.
What is the difference between a 2S and a 2M receiver? My Costco fitter replaced one recently because I was having problems, and I just discovered that the replacement is a 2M; originally both were 2S; now one is 2S the other is 2M.
The 2S receiver is the standard, lowest power receiver. The 2M is the medium power receiver. I wasn’t aware that one could mix and match, but I’m a complete newby.If you look at the datasheet for the Kirkland Signature 7.0, it will show the fitting curves for the S, M, P and HP receivers.
The datasheet agrees with what you wrote. What puzzles me is that besides different power, the frequency response curve is also different (average current consumption 0.9 mA vs 1.0 mA, and battery duration as well 7 vs 6 days). While it makes sense that different types of receivers have different curves, I agree with you: why mix them? One type of receiver must have been optimized by Rexton for my audio test. So there must have been a mistake either during the first fitting or when one receiver was recently replaced.
What puzzles me is that besides different power, the frequency response curve is also different (average current consumption 0.9 mA vs 1.0 mA, and battery duration as well 7 vs 6 days). While it makes sense that different types of receivers have different curves, I agree with you: why mix them? One type of receiver must have been optimized by Rexton for my audio test. So there must have been a mistake either during the first fitting or when one receiver was recently replaced.
There is no “frequency response curve” as such. The fitting curve shows the rough limits of the design capabilities of the hearing aid/receiver combination. Principal among these is, of course, output power, but I assume that these limits reflect other engineering criteria as well (such as the ranges in which the various amplitude- and frequency-dependent algorithms operate as they should).
But if you’re referring to the other sets of graphs, these reflect, generally speaking, the hearing aid/receivers input/output function. In this sense, they are “frequency response curves,” but again they only show limits.
What determines the actual frequency response curve, i.e. the input/output function of the hearing aid when you are actually using it, is the way the aid is set up to respond to your very specific requirements. Objectively, these are based mainly on your . There are also other objective criteria, most notably the “fitting rule” that gets applied. (This is a non-linear algorithm – and there are several – that attempts to alter gain to deliver the most effective result, generally for speech.) A good clinic will then use some sort of “real ear” measurement to determine whether or not the aids are actually performing as they should when they’re stuck in the acoustically complex environment of your ear.
There are also lots of subjective factors, which is why there’s so much attention paid in these forums to what happens when you go back to the clinic for adjustments. For example, I worked in radio for ages so I’m very used to hearing my own voice amplified and replayed to me. Issues around occlusion and accepting how my own voice sounds are much easier for me to deal with – and thus of much less clinical concern – than they might be to other clients. But there are thousands of example. Some people spend a lot of time in cars; others rarely ride in them; and so on.
So the datasheets are only a very rough guide, and the input/output function graphs are only there – as far as I can amateurishly figure out (shout-out to Dr. J!) – because they are objective measurements of what the hearing aids do. And the fitting curves are there to show clinicians what the useful clinical operating limits of the aids are, roughly.
The reason for the discrepancies in current consumption (and thus battery life) is the difference in receiver power levels. The output circuitry of the aid is in the receiver, and the more power the receiver needs to deliver, the more current it will consume.
As for why the person at Costco fitted you, eventually, with two different power level receivers, I simply don’t know. You could ask them, or maybe somebody else will weigh in on this. But that in itself does not say that the two aids have different “frequency response curves” (although wouldn’t making this change require hooking the aids up to the fitting computer and suitably reconfiguring them?). Haha although of course I could speculate! The loss in your left ear seems to fall well within the range of the S receiver. But maybe for your right ear, it’s the notch at 500Hz. (?) This falls right on the edge of the S receiver’s fitting range (or off of it, depending on what sort of dome/mold you’re using). I seem to recall having read elsewhere on this forum that it’s generally bad practice to fit right on the lower edge of the fitting curve.
Here are the relevant fitting curves for the Trax 42:
As for why the person at Costco fitted you, eventually, with two different power level receivers, I simply don’t know. You could ask them, or maybe somebody else will weigh in on this. But that in itself does not say that the two aids have different “frequency response curves” (although wouldn’t making this change require hooking the aids up to the fitting computer and suitably reconfiguring them?). Haha although of course I could speculate! The loss in your left ear seems to fall well within the range of the S receiver. But maybe for your right ear, it’s the notch at 500Hz. (?) This falls right on the edge of the S receiver’s fitting range (or off of it, depending on what sort of dome/mold you’re using). I seem to recall having read elsewhere on this forum that it’s generally bad practice to fit right on the lower edge of the fitting curve.
Thanks for your thoughtful suggestion, it will be of great help when I go ask the fitter. The frequency response curve I was referring to, is the one that came in the box with the device. It seems different from your fitting range chart you attached. See my attachments (I was trying to attach them as one page, to easily compare them side to side, but there is a file size limit on attachments)
Thanks for your thoughtful suggestion, it will be of great help when I go ask the fitter. The frequency response curve I was referring to, is the one that came in the box with the device. It seems different from your fitting range chart you attached. See my attachments (I was trying to attach them as one page, to easily compare them side to side, but there is a file size limit on attachments)
These are the other curves I was referring to. Again, they only show the operating limits of the device. The M receiver is capable of producing a higher output level, which the curves reflect. Similarly, the frequency response curves reflect limits.
But in operation, the aids will not be pushing these limits, but rather operating well within them (one hopes). The fitting curves are meant to present those limits, as well – I assume! – as others that matter, such as the operating limits of noise-reduction algorithms, etc. in a way that is useful clinically.
You’ll also note that there are huge differences in these operating criteria depending on the acoustic environment to which the aid is coupled – i.e. the coupler and the ear simulator. This process – getting the sound from the world around you and into your brain as useful information – is full of huge, unavoidable non-linearities.
All of this having been said, it does strike me – again the disclaimer: I have basically no idea what I’m talking about! – as odd that they’d fit the two different receivers, for the reasons you’re alluding to here. I mean, why bother, unless it was absolutely necessary? But it appears the fitting software can definitely accommodate this, and deal with a different power-level receiver in each ear (and thus, any difference in i/o specs between them).
My audiologist put the S receiver back on the left, and the situation improved.
To summarise, I originally had 2S receivers on both left and right; then the left started acting up, and he replaced, just the left, with a 2M receiver. He said he adapted the programming to the different gain of the M receiver; however, there was some remarkable distortion. I went back and asked to please put the 2S receiver back, and things have definitely gone back to normal. However, the left receiver now says 3S, while the original one said 2S. Is the difference between 2S and 3S just the length of the wire? And how much? Somebody posted a document referring to different cable lengths, but no other detail is given. (The left cable now is sticking out a little)
Finally, trying to understand the cause of my initial problem: is it possible that everything was caused by the battery of the remote? After switching receivers the first time, the battery of the remote died, and I’m now thinking that perhaps the remote was giving wrong commands: causing one hearing aid to either change programs, change the volume or turning on off. Has that ever happened to anybody?
-<snip>- Is the difference between 2S and 3S just the length of the wire? And how much? Somebody posted a document referring to different cable lengths, but no other detail is given. (The left cable now is sticking out a little)-<snip>-
Yes 2 is shorter than 3 by about this much >>ear measurement tool39<< which is enough to make the wire stick out instead of lying flat against your ear.
Wales, UK
Munich
