LE Audio and the Future of Hearing

Interesting, I wonder if we will see Auracast in the Philips hearing aids soon.

Absolutely we will, every HA manufacturer will be in on this, but Phonak… well they’ll probably drag their feet a bit.

Aye @tenkan that’s a given, and unless Phonak can make money out of Auracast, they will most probably stick with Roger ALD’s… Cheers Kev

Is the latency of LE Audio going to be less than MFi or ASHA? - I understand it is significantly better than standard Bluetooth (Phonak). Has anyone published any comparisons?

I have been looking into latency a little bit, and it appears a tricky subject for streaming and can vary widely between different streaming devices and from software delaying video signals etc. Apparently even standard Bluetooth has a delay reporting feature which allows HA/headphones to report a delay to the streaming device, so the apps can acquire the number and use it. (But that is not helpful in situation where broadcast is simultaneously outputting sound to speakers and streaming to hearing aids.)

My experience with MFi on my hearing aids vs bluetooth headphones (various models) has been that the latency is much lower with MFi. Will it be better still with LE Audio?

@Gazza5982 said:

My experience with MFi on my hearing aids vs bluetooth headphones (various models) has been that the latency is much lower with MFi. Will it be better still with LE Audio?

Hard to find documentation of MFI and Roger that specify latency but the technical data sheet for the Oticon (MFi) TV adapter gives a latency of 25 milliseconds for input to the adapter to the output of the hearing aid receiver for an analog input to the RCA connectors. For input to the optical (TOSLINK), the latency is 28 milliseconds for stereo and 45 milliseconds for Dolby. I found a Phonak doc that claimed latency for Roger devices was no more than 25 milliseconds.

I’ve tried reading some bluetooth docs and I found that the specified latency changes depending on the settings of the LCC codec. Some devices that others have posted about specify the latency as 60 milliseconds. So I’m not at all sure what latency to expect for LE Audio devices - it may depend on the devices and how they are set up.

Hopefully others know and can comment …

@biggar said:

Hard to find documentation of MFI and Roger that specify latency

Not sure why you’re bringing Roger into the comparison. For Phonak HAs, the proper comparison would be classic Bluetooth latency. The latency in classic Bluetooth audio devices is 100 milliseconds. And most Phonak connectivity with smartphones, TVs, computers, etc., will be by classic BT. As you pointed out, even if you used Roger as an intermediate device, you’d still be adding additional latency in the connection from your device, e.g., your computer, to your Roger device to stream to your HAs. And no one will use a Roger device with their smartphone to stream to their HAs. It’s going to be classic BT all the way. When BT LE Audio gets going, just like now with classic BT, there will be low-latency LE Audio streaming directly from a wide variety of devices direct to your LE Audio HAs. And since it will hopefully be a universally accepted standard, there will be very capable remote microphone devices that are much cheaper than Phonak’s costly Roger devices. And if one switches HA brands, one hopefully won’t have to throw out all accessories and buy new ones as generic standard LE Audio promises interoperability. Hope it delivers on that promise.

@biggar said:

Some devices that others have posted about specify the latency as 60 milliseconds. So I’m not at all sure what latency to expect for LE Audio devices

“What’s more important is that LE Audio lowers the audio latency of the wireless stream. According to Bluetooth SIG, the latency is between 20 to 30ms. In comparison, the SBC codec operates between 170 to 270 ms” (Source1)

Not sure if I’ve understood it right!

You could potentially use your Auracast enabled Smartphone/Tablet/PC to stream Auracast station (feed) to your HA, even if your HA aren’t Auracast compatible, (In this case you will need your Smartphone/Tablet/PC), is this correct?

For example, someone could get an S24 with Auracast enabled and audio stream any Auracast feed to his/her Audeo Marvel?

Thx

Pretty sure this is incorrect. To stream Auracast one would need compatible “Assistant” device (smartphone, etc.) AND compatible hearing aid (currently only Resound Nexia and related hearing aids)

It seems that the new Samsung S24 series indeed has Auracast. Not only that, the phone can act as a transmitter as well as a receiver! Furthermore this capability may come down to earlier models (according to the linked video) it seems.

I expect to get mine in the next couple of days - will be able to see if this is true! I wonder when I will encounter a public Auracast broadcast - I suspect it will be a while…

I think of the Assistant as like a radio tuner. It lets you select what broadcast your hearing aids get. Probably what you mean by “dispatcher.”

@anon33641277 said:

What is “Auracast Assistant” inside the smartphone?

It sends the hearing aids the details that they need to listen to the broadcast. Once the aids have that information and are receiving the broadcast, it is no longer necessary. You could turn the phone off at that point.

On a related note, I was reading a piece on the Auracast booth at CES 2024. According to the writer who attended, when they got there they were handed ear buds and Apple phones with Auracast assistant apps. I found that interesting.

Were the ear buds Auracast?
I suppose the iphones were bluetooth 5.3 LE!!!

They must have been or the whole ‘demo’ was faked. The iPhones might be 5.2 or 5.3, but are not certified for LE Audio as far as I know.