Phonak Rechargeable vs Battery-Operated Aids

It’s probably not possible to have it integrated in the chip. So additional physical space is wasted. What they want to avoid in favor to space for a lager battery.
In addition to that each step up or down of power supply voltages has the downside of additional power loss.

A friend of mine designs consumer electronics, so he’s tuned into this stuff. He pointed me to this accelerometer that works down to 1.1V. The spec sheet shows current draws. They look pretty low. The listed applications include hearing aids.

https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/analog-devices-inc/ADXL367BCCZ-RL7/1636057910

Which means they’ll run off normal batteries too. So the point about making devices rechargeable in order to add this feature is moot.

I sometimes wonder why they don’t power these higher voltage devices via a voltage multiplier.

WH

Let’s compare sound sampling rate to accelerometer sampling rate. Assuming the Paradise frequency range tops out at 8KHz, they have to sample the sound no less than 16000 times per second. The accelerometer’s output data rate is selectable between 12.5 and 400 times per second. So, even if Phonak uses the maximum output data rate, which I tend to doubt, they have to process sound at a far higher rate than they process acceleration data. For this reason, I don’t think it’s a likely explanation.

I’m not talking about the extra battery required to power the accelerometer. My point is that the new speech recognition software (and the Life features) that are using the accelerometer data (i.e Autosense 5.0) are using more processor power to enable these advanced features and are probably drawing more power. Kinda like the way that some apps on your mobile phone chew more power than others.

Only a Phonak hardware and software engineer can provide the true answer but that is my guess.

Jordan

@JordanK said:

the new speech recognition software (and the Life features) that are using the accelerometer data (i.e Autosense 5.0) are using more processor power to enable these advanced features and are probably drawing more power.

This excerpt from “Fitting and Dispensing Hearing Aids, Third Edition” explains how it works. The accelerometer data (which isn’t all that computationally expensive to interpret, compared to sound) is used to activate modes that already exist in hearing aids.

@prodigyplace said:

Phonak seems to be the only major brand insisting on using Bluetooth Classic. The reduced runtime led me to order Oticon aids.

Going from Phonak to Oticon.

LE Bluetooth is offering me so much more (I think because I also have an iPhone?) then the Classic Bluetooth.

I agree. About 9 years ago I moved from Android to iPhone partially because of my MFi aids. At the time I had a Google Nexus phone but needed to change phones because we chose to consolidate the Damon the one carrier where my phone would not work due to a dispute with Google

@sterei said:

I agree, we are just guessing here.

Informed speculation, like I’m doing, is at least a step above guessing. I can think of some other posters with the technical knowledge to weigh in. No need for circuit design expertise like I stipulated before, because we have the spec sheet for an accelerometer compatible with disposable batteries.

@jeffrey said:

I still don’t think I’ve heard a plain speaking answer to my earlier question. Do rechargeable aids allow for more features/programs to be integrated into their hard and software, as compared to disposable battery aids?

On the narrower question of accelerometer-based features, my plain answer is that they can be integrated into both kinds of aids. I wouldn’t know where to start answering your broad question.

@jeffrey said:

Holy cow, when was this written, 1964?

His writing style is corny, true.

@jim_lewis said:

I think what’s missing is better automatic processing of speech in noise in this particular type of situation. The Omnias were much less aggressive (and sudden) in damping down the noise.

This is the “magic bullet” that I daydream about: find that sweet spot of human speech (dB + Hz) and BOOST it for better speech comprehension in myriad environments.

I also thoroughly enjoyed the discourse on HOMOPHONES in that link - and that’s a new word for me.

I find myself torn between “dampen down” and “tamp down” in addition to “hone in” and “home in”, “carome” and “careen” or even “who” or “whom”.

I think the real problem is that our HAs are “dumb” and not smart like the manufacturers would like us to believe, the HAs can’t actually tell what’s been spoken/human speech with all the other sounds going on around, plus that human speech constantly changes in frequencies and loudness as we speak, when we get “real AI” this problem will be eliminated, and not to be outdone, the “Smart Glasses” coming out with live captions will be a godsend fot the profound community.

@tenkan said:

HAs can’t actually tell what’s been spoken/human speech with all the other sounds going on around

I have suspected as much. And yes, perhaps when AI really gets smart, they’ll figure it out. Human speech goes up and down, but if there is a constant drumbeat, vibration, frequency band used, etc., the AI could “figure” that it’s speech and perhaps increase the clarity or volume.

Until that feature is perfected, I can imagine YEARS of frustration with the AI also increasing volume and clarity of things that aren’t speech.

Altho when you look at that speech banana chart WHAT ELSE is in our human speech frequency? No dogs, dripping water, piano, jackhammer, spoon clinking on a glass at weddings, etc.,). Seriously, how tough can this be? If our country’s security depended upon it, there’d be a working solution right now.

Hope springs eternal…

@1Bluejay said:

the noise management on my aids is STILL TOO AGGRESSIVE.

Ask for NoiseBlock to be turned down. I had mine off.