Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Philips HearLink 9030 or Oticon More 3?

This topic is closed.

47 replies9k viewsLast reply

Jump
Link to this topic

In reply to @SpudGunner

@SpudGunner said:

My point was to refute the notion of a legitimate manipulation of the Genie software versus more intrusive ways to re-enable intentionally defeated features.

Sure I missed that point.

@SpudGunner said:

Surely the minutiae are not essential to the differentiation?

One would think not, but it’s just not feasible to consider at that level, like as in microscopic, the “hack” would need to be in the specialist software (obviously not manufacturers programming software)

In reply to @tenkan

2 nm would be a huge jump if they get it to work. You’re now operating on the level where an electron can jump from one path to another at that size. I know 4 nm is being kicked around. I sort of doubt even a 10 nm etched chip is needed for a , even an advanced one. The calculations aren’t nearly as fast as say a contemporary CPU/GPU these days. Hard x ray lithography needed for those sizes require pretty serious expensive foundries and I’m not sure running a DSP through those facilities Is cost effective at all. Although maybe for teeny tiny chips for might have some benefit and maybe increase options for the user.

@eskie227 said:

2 nm would be a huge jump if they get it to work. You’re now operating on the level where an electron can jump from one path to another at that size.

Yeah it was pretty impressive, I wasn’t suggesting 2nm for , just pointing out how small things are getting, 4nm is cool but this from IBM

IBM Unveils World's First 2 Nanometer Chip Technology, Opening a New Frontier...3

IBM (NYSE: IBM) today unveiled a breakthrough in semiconductor design and process with the development of the world's first chip announced with 2 nanometer (nm) nanosheet technology....

Edited

In reply to @tenkan

You’re way more advanced in your knowledge of hearing aids, software, hardware than I am. I actually imagined that there might be a way to get into the manufacturer’s software and remove the obstacles that prevent a More3 from using its identical hardware to behave like a More1.

You would know whether such a thing is feasible or not. Personally, I don’t advocate such illegal hacks - it’s too slippery a slope.

I do, however, strongly object to the obscene profit margins taken by so many lines of business (including, but not confined to ) whose product exclusivity and necessity create hegemonies permitting them to gouge their customers without redress.

Perhaps a few well-publicized hacks might wise them up? Or maybe not? :joy:

I’m impressed by Unitron’s willingness to admit that the functionality of their technology levels is software-driven, and can be adjusted upwards (for a price, to be sure). If I could have, for instance, upgraded my More3s to More1s by a simple reprogramming in my audiologist’s office, sans the complete exchange of all my hardware (including accessories), surely the price could have been reduced from the $1,500.00 I was obliged to pay.

The question is: how do we get from here to there? Not by rampant hacking, I don’t think, but what clarion call will the industry heed?

[BTW: Thanks for the IBM link.]

Thanks to Volusiano and all of you who have weighed in. The engineering details may have gone over my head, but I definitely have a better understanding of how sound is processed. After a lot of reading, and a discussion with my non-Costco audi, I’m going to trial the More 2 and promise to report back once I’ve had them for awhile. The Philips aids are nice, and maybe I’ll keep them, but the open sound environment is too appealing not to try it out. Plus I like that the More is rated for 24 hours on its rechargeable battery. The Philips say they’re good for 16 hours. Even if the real time varies (it will, of course) 50% more is significant. Oh, and in regard to future battery replacement: Philips, like Oticon, can be replaced by the audi rather than having to be sent in. A+ choice for both of them. Now, if they could only make a more portable charging unit…ah well, nothing’s perfect.

Edited

@epolito: This is just a heads up - if you’ve never worn Oticons before, it may take your brain 2 or 3 days before it ceases to be overwhelmed by your broader soundscape. To be sure, it’ll take much longer than 3 days for you to completely acclimate to the new sounds presented to you, as well as to complete the process of fitting this amazing technology to your hearing deficit, in concert with your audiologist.

I encourage you (as I’m sure @cvkemp will echo) to stick with it and come back here if your audiologist is trying to sell you a bucket of BS when you insist on getting the performance that satisfies your needs.

There are enough Oticonians in the Forum now, who have experience with Opn, OpnS, and More, to provide you with intelligent answers.

Above all, best of luck in obtaining the best possible hearing instruments to address your hearing loss.

If you succeed, it will literally change your life for the better.

[Cavete vobis audivimus!]

I’ll offer a different perspective. I’ve tried Oticons. Admittedly it was the OPN 1, so not the latest, but I was not struck by anything dramatcically different about them. They were nice hearing aids, but it was not a life changing experience. For some it apparently is.

Yes, I remember you saying this before - I think it just proves one thing, and that is everyone’s brain hears differently.

I don’t think I am the only one for whom the OpenSound concept has opened up major new hearing vistas, however.

In reply to @MDB

As someone that has been wearing Oticon aids for 11 years or so, I am so use with the Oticon “sound”. I have tried most of the other brands, and just haven’t like their sound. And I will say when I went from the Oticon Atra Pros to the OPN1 it was a WOW change for me. At this time I am wearing OPNS1 aids and find them a step forward from the OPN1 aids, and a world a head of the other brands I have tried for my likes. I will be getting the More1 aids in about a month.
But I have to say while I love the 360 hearing I get with the newer Oticon aids they will take time to get used to for people use to directional hearing aids. My brain is still relearning how to hear in surround sound. And it is something that s removing stress from my life and removing stress between me and my wife, it that she is knowing that most time I hear her even when she is talking to me and I don’t see her.
But the open hearing of Oticon isn’t for the impatient person you have to be patient and give your brain the needed time to relearn how things sound differently.

I guess what it gets me is that the impression is given that one doesn’t hear sounds all around you with other hearing aids. I hear birds and insects and the sounds of crackling leaves. Don’t get me wrong. The OPNs were very nice hearing aids, but they weren’t magical and I sometimes get the impression from the forum that they are.

That is very possible, it also depends on how long you trailed them for. To be honest I had issues at first and it took a series of appointments and adjustments to get to where I am with them now. Before the OPN1 aids I couldn’t understand anything said to me from anyone I wasn’t looking straight at. Now I can hear people in a lecture hall that are behind me without me turning around to look at them.
Before I was nervous about be on the hiking trail and having some animal coming up behind me without me hearing it. Now I have a chance for f hearing it.

Funny, reading this and having cochlear implants.

My processors have different programs like hearing aids. Some programs have more or less noise reduction. You could label this anything. It’s really pretty amazing.

Reading about the different hearing aids and how they have different sound from other aids is pretty much a tuning thing. Self programming hearing aids for 11-12 years has taught me just how flexible these new digital aids are. Most any new modern hearing aid can be tuned in so many ways.

The difference is the fitter in my honest opinion.
What I have read in this forum is that the difference is reliability. Some brands are better than others. Like automobiles, they all are getting better.

In reply to @MDB

They are magic for people like me who wore ill-fitted, ineffectual hearing aids for 6 years - but I have always acknowledged that probably any make of properly adjusted devices would have been magic, too, at that point in time.

I think you’re painting our comments about “OpenSound” as too binary: nobody has ever claimed that you can’t hear peripheral sounds with beam-forming hearing aids. Of course you can hear them.

With Oticon devices, it’s the degree of openness without sacrificing the intelligibility of speech in noise that is different.

I started with Oticon about 18 years ago, with great results. Next, I had a well-fitted pair of Unitron Moxis that served me well, but were perceptibly directional. My next pair of Unitron North Moxi Fit 800s were a write off from day 1, thanks to an incompetent audiologist who could never fit them to my needs.

So after that, putting More3s into my ears was magical, again.

YMMV, and nobody has ever claimed otherwise, I don’t think.

Edited

In reply to @MDB

@MDB said:

I guess what it gets me is that the impression is given that one doesn’t hear sounds all around you with other hearing aids. I hear birds and insects and the sounds of crackling leaves.

I would think that the readers on this forum are more sophisticated to understand the difference that we’re only talking about speech in noise situations here and not just implying a general impression that other hearing aids always block sounds no matter what situation it is.

I hope it’s been clear enough that the difference with the OPN is that you can converse with someone else in a noisy situation and still being able to hear other sounds around you at the same time. With the traditional hearing aids, you can converse in a noisy situation but you can miss out on sounds around you. For example, a waiter sneaking up behind you and asking you questions in a restaurant. Or another person on the side to you trying to say something to you while you’re looking straight ahead. Even just the ambience of the room, like the background music, etc. Of course it’s not just the desired sounds that you want to hear. You’ll also hear the dishes clattering, the noisy tables around you that you don’t care to hear laughing and chattering…

I remember when I first tried out the OPN. The road noise, the noise, the fan noise, traffic on the street below my daughter’s apartment… they all bugged the heck out of me. But now I don’t even think about it, although I still hear them all.

@Volusiano said:

I would think that the readers on this forum are more sophisticated to understand the difference.

We all have different hearing. To generalize and say one thing is better than another concerning hearing is questionable.
We should find ways to support each other. I know that’s not anywhere as much fun though.

Edited

I fully agree. But saying one thing is different than another is not the same as saying one thing is better than another, though. If a reader infers on their own that one thing is better than another from what they read, then that’s on them. Of course it’s their hearing to infer however they want.

I am considering the 9030 vs the more 3. Noise reduction isn’t a issue as restaurants are too noisy for me. I have trial-ed the more1 and it worked well in hearing my wife. For just understanding my wife in my home, would there be any difference between the 9030 and the more 3? Thanks

There would be differences, but I suspect you’d do just fine with the Phillips 9030.

In reply to @mbsalty

@mbsalty: I believe that almost amy hearing aid from one of the big 6 will - if correctly fitted - give good performance in the quiet of home (unless you have a particular desire for a specific feature such as Oticon’s OpenSound concept).

Related discussions