Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Trialing two makes and models of hearing aids concurrently, or owning two different sets of hearing aids

This topic is closed.

17 replies1.4k viewsLast reply

Link to this topic
Edited

I have a lot of questions today - thanks for being here. Does anyone here see trialing 2 different pairs of concurrently, for comparison shopping, as a bad idea for any reason? Also, do we sometimes end up owning two different makes and models, for example one model for music (I work in music production) and one model for speech?

10 people in this conversation4 min readJump to latest

Yes, it’s a bad idea. No, you need to relearn to hear and adjust to just one model of hearing aid. One for speech and one for music is suboptimal at best.

I’d say you might want to have some overlap in the different trials. Of course that would depend on how long the trials are. Say you try one brand for six weeks. After the first four weeks you start a trial of a different brand.

My idea is that you have four weeks to get used to the first brand and have some follow-up adjustments. Then you you have both Brand A and Brand B for two weeks.

Maybe Brand B is way better or way worse than Brand A right out of the box. In that case, you’ll probably know if it’s worth trying to get further adjustments on either brand.

More likely the two brands will be close to the same subjective quality. In that case you will have two weeks to switch off between the two brands and at the end of those two weeks you’ll probably have a good idea of which one you like better. That way you’re not just comparing Brand B with your memory of what Brand A sounded like.

Just a further curiosity sparked by this thread. Some hearing professionals recommend something lower than the highest technology level. Would it make any sense to trial 2 levels of the same model to try & determine of the higher technology would add benefit?

Perhaps a better strategy would be to trial the highest technology level and later trial the lower, recommended one to see if benefits are lost?

Tends to be the way we run: demo sets are always the top of the range. Free ‘Trial’ without cost (£40 for test fee), go away for two weeks - if you like what you hear, call us back and talk turkey about which level suits your budget and needs. We order that and then you pay - you have a further 60 days to evaluate them - return for refund (or exchange to a different model) is acceptable in this period.

I think it would be confusing to trial both concurrently. I would think people using different hearing aids for music and speech would be pretty uncommon. Having a separate music program on hearing aids is very common and I think the most reasonable way to go. Some people for whom music is important prefer earbuds or headphones instead of hearing aids for listening to music.

In reply to @Um_bongo

@Um_bongo said:

Free ‘Trial’ without cost

In the US apparently that varies by state. Here in Virginia there must be a free trial period with a maximum charge of 5%, I believe. In North Carolina where I just got my aids they do not mandate a trial period. Duke has a 60 day refund period less $400. Costco in the US has a 180 day full refund period. For refundable aids, you purchase and pay for them when fitted.

Programs from one maker to another may sound different.
For example,I tried a pair of TOTL Phonak Audeo Paradise 90 ,for awhile,then moved on to TOTL Widex Moment 440 RIC,but kept the music profile from the Phonak’s to try on the Widex,but that profile was unlistenable on the 440’s,so for me, programs from different HA makers,especially for music,do sound different,at least in my case.Huck

I think that unless you’re matching the output of the two devices it’s not really much of a comparison.

In reply to @prodigyplace

Most hearing professionals should recommend what they feel is best for their patient, and for some, maybe the highest tech level is needed, while for others it isn’t needed. But I would be leery of an audiologist who would make a blanket statement that something less than the highest level is needed. I personally opt for the highest level and always have, because I want the best I can get and with all the bells and whistles and am willing to pay for it.

In reply to @auntpie

What if the Audiologist observes that the client is never in sufficiently noisy/challenging conditions and the middle level technology is more than enough? Should they still recommend on the most expensive products simply because ’you’ can afford it?

@Um_bongo said:

What if the Audiologist observes that the client is never in sufficiently noisy/challenging conditions and the middle level technology is more than enough?

You follow your clients to know their environments or just assume based upon what they remember? They may not realize challenging situations.

In reply to @prodigyplace

Not always possible, but you can do it by data logging the environment complexity on the trials and asking pertinent questions.

For a couple of reasons, women (with presbyacusis) sometimes need better help than men too.

@user172 , if you do decide to get a second set of to use only when doing professional music work, you might want to ask a tax advisor if the cost of that second set of HAs would be tax-deductible. It seems to me that you could make a pretty good case that a dedicated pair of HAs just for music work would be just another piece of equipment that would help you do your job better. The tax deduction, if allowable, would help offset the cost of the second set of HAs. Maybe also ask your tax advisor if a trip to see Marshall Chasin would be deductible.

Active discussions

What the forum has been talking about this week.