Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Hypothesis: custom molds optimize speech intelligibility for RIC w/ my audiogram

This topic is closed.

78 replies5.7k viewsLast reply

Jump
Link to this topic

So far no feedback with the SlimTip molds and the M Receivers. I had feedback galore with the double-domes and the P Receivers, only occurring when in proximity to walls, none when sitting or standing in an open space. As for understanding Karen’s soft high frequency voice, the jury is still out as I think I did ask her to repeat herself a few times yesterday, but she was not facing me when she spoke because she was reading something to me off her computer screen.

I think the only significant downside to frequency compression is that it can mess up music. That said, I believe you can use in all the programs but turn it off for a manual music program.

@Sierra said:

think the only significant downside to frequency compression is that it can mess up music.

My Frankenstein fear was that, at some point, frequency compression could turn the female voice I love into a male-sounding voice! Hopefully that is an extreme result existing only in the outer fringes of my imagination. LOL!

This has not been the case at all. The shifted frequencies are not put in a small zone of lowered frequencies. They are spread out enough in lower frequencies to get a very detailed separation of sounds. Women and children are very noticeably higher frequency sounding than men for example.

technology has been a blessing for me as have custom earmolds. Both have enabled me to hear better and improve speech recognition.

Here is an article I came across on frequency lowering8. It says that one of the issues you may notice is that people develop a lisp. “s” sounds are not heard well or perhaps not at all by those of us with high frequency hearing loss. Apparently we get used to hearing an “s” as a short sound, rather than a long drawn out sound. Then when hearing is corrected by more gain, or by , people magically get a lisp. I think the bottom line is that it may take some time to get used to, but in actual fact you are hearing things more like they really are, rather than what you have gotten used to.

In reply to @Sierra

Another issue with if you’re trying to shift things too low is distortion of vowel sounds. That’s why for some people frequency lowering can make things worse. Something to consider is that telephone (at least POTS) only goes up to 3500 hz.

Edited

In reply to @NateS

I highly recommend that type of modification of SlimTips, they are airtight and keep strongly my ear even during eating. They are also my first custom earmolds with no venting.

EDIT: It’s a modified (idea of my audi) cShell, not SlimTip - my mistake!

20200129_020848 20200129_020806 20200129_020740

The SlimTip at the pictures above have P receiver, but theoretically, the M receiver also fits to me. In your opinion - which is better? Does wider frequency range in M would give me better experience?

receivers

The author of the article at the link below makes the case that the bandwidth limitation and increased noise only manifest themselves if you use the increased power of a more powerful receiver. In other words if the M and P are used at the same power level but not over the limit of the M, then noise and bandwidth should be the same.

Are Larger Hearing Aid Receivers Really Noisier?9

Edited

I’m sorry, my mistake, it isn’t SlimTip, it’s a cShell.

Look on the page 6 of below:

My audi give Phonak an instructions to attach to it a thing, which in Poland we discribe as “pazur” (literally: “claw” but I don’t know english term). It’s a structure which looks like an acrylic (de)formed ring, which is cut in one point and in which way obtained ends were attached to cShell custom earmold. This structure fills your auricle, which make stable position of earmold.

The con of this solution is the receiver is mounted in way that forces you/your audi have to sell it to Phonak if you want to replace/change the receiver.

Edited

In reply to @NateS

I’ve circled what you are potentially missing, given a perfect fit. It’s not a lot.

NateS

@NateS said:

And if you know, why did Phonak choose to make the SlimTips with the narrower inside diameter if they knew I was wearing Power receivers?

Phonak probably got back to your audiologist and said “The P receiver won’t fit. Do you want to proceed with a slimtip and an M receiver, or move to a cShell with a P receiver?” And your provider said “M” thinking she could just jam the P receiver in. :man_shrugging: Sometimes that works.

In reply to @Bimodal_user

@Bimodal_user said:

My audi give Phonak an instructions to attach to it a thing, which in Poland we discribe as “pazur” (literally: “claw” but I don’t know english term). It’s a structure which looks like an acrylic (de)formed ring, which is cut in one point and in which way obtained ends were attached to cShell custom earmold. This structure fills your auricle, which make stable position of earmold.

Perhaps like one of these?:
http://otohearing.com/index.php/oto-products-2/custom-bte-earmolds13

Edited

In reply to @Neville

@Neville, thanks for graphs! Are they calculated for custom earmold with no venting? I’m a bit disappointed - I though that occluded fitting could provide full gain in the highest frequencies, particularly when I have the audibility 4K and 8K a bit better than 1k-2k range. But I’m thankful for your investigation :wink:

@NateS, unfortunately, the link don’t work, maybe it’s accessible only for Americans. Maybe show the screen, please?

Screenshot_20200130-074238_Chrome

Related discussions