My Oticon Real experience

@prodigyplace: Sorry - I didn’t mean to derail the thread talking about my pain issues.

IMO no apology is needed. It proves we are all humans here.

@SpudGunner said:

Sorry - I didn’t mean to derail the thread talking about my pain issues.

Hey, Spud Those issues are relevant to this thread because they pertain to REAL Oticon users!
I’m certain that MORE of us suffer pain, and we just need to be OPN about it!!

When you are happy, you tend to forget about the pain. Be happy & play your lovely music/song!

Update on my experience so far…

Have been in a few noisy environments such as a pub, and tried out speechbooster in this circumstance and it was actually quite good. I was able to hear and follow the conversation, and it was incredibly loud in the background. Previously, I would have just been lost with my OPNs, and wouldn’t have been able to pull the speech from the noise in an environment that loud.

There has a lot of wind here in Denmark and the wind stabiliser is amazing. I was able to follow and have a conversation with family while walking and not having to turn to lip-read. Sharp and clear speech.

Sounds are sharper, and clearer with the Reals.

I even tried my OPNs on again, and the difference was astounding. It just felt flat and I had to make a significant amount of effort to hear, and having to lip-read. Within minutes, I returned to my Reals.

I feel I have to make less effort to hear now, and as the days go by, I’m getting more used to them. Once I have my skeleton moulds, I’ll be really happy with them. Definitely a huge difference in sound, listening effort and tones of sounds for me.

That entire page is due for a re-write post Real. Lots happening, we’re a little behind, but working on it. We’ve also tested Real in the HearAdvisor lab, and that data and the lab review will soon be coming to HearingTracker. In the meantime, you can read Matthew’s review (and see his video) here: Oticon Real Hearing Aids | Reviews, Prices, and Sound Samples34

@AbramBaileyAuD: May I suggest that, for the time being, you pin a caveat that the material is not accurate, as it stands, and is currently being updated

I would buy the HAs at the audiologist that can do the REM. They will certainly charge extra, if they will even agree, to perform REM on aids bought elsewhere.

If you have already had a hearing test, and believe it was performed competently, ask for a copy of the audiogram. The new audiologist will be able to use that.

For minor tweaking, after waiting for a couple of weeks after the initial fitting, the audiologist might be able to adjust remotely, or you could try DIY.

@mstrmac said:

The new Audiologist may want to do another hearing test before doing REM obviously, but another question is will the LOCAL audiologist have the updated targets updated once my Aids connection is established on that office program? That program setting will be updated automatically in other words so that later in time I may want to adjust or tweak certain things.

Another problem is if receivers need replaced for whatever reason, REM will need redone. So basically I’m answering my own question….drive one hour away and buy the new aids there and save the hassle with the local shop.

I don’t think the new audi would need to do another hearing test for you if your first (local) audi already did a hearing test for you very recently. If the new audi throws it out as an additional cost option for a new hearing test, I would decline. But if it’s all part of the service package for REM and wouldn’t cost anymore, then the only cost is your and their time to redo the audiogram test.

If your local audi already programmed in your Real aids based on the audiogram, then the REM audi should be able to access the data already programmed in your aids to do REM on, unless they prefer to redo everything from scratch for you with the programming, which shouldn’t take that long anyway.

As for future adjustments after REM is done by the distant audi, the local audi can do future adjustments on the gain curve that has the REM adjustments built-in, because this REM-adjusted gain curve is already stored in your hearing aids. Just make sure the local audi load the REM-adjusted data that reside on the hearing aids into Genie 2 (the software) before making adjustment, and not use the original stale data he/she has in the original database.

Replacing bad receivers with the exact same size receivers and still using the same fitting as before (domes or molds or whatever) should not require REM to be redone. But if you change the type of fitting (like from open domes to closed domes, or from domes to molds, or change receiver size, etc), this would require an update to the Genie 2 programming that would prompt a new prescription to the gain curve, then REM should be done again.

@Volusiano said:

Replacing bad receivers with the exact same size receivers and still using the same fitting as before (domes or molds or whatever) should not require REM to be redone

Sorry I’m hijacking the thread again but demoing the Reals.

Thanks for the response above…this quote stands out. If the receivers are manufactured to exact tolerances, the receivers after years of use don’t degrade and the Hearing aids themselves are manufactured to exact tolerances and have precise output…then the only real gain for doing REM is the individuals ear canal shape and depth when using the same type of mold and air vent.

I find this amazing, the subtle variation in left right canals. The audiologist doing the REM must precisely position the mics exactly in front of the ear drum. The adjustment of output all across the programmed audiogram because of canal curvature, depth, canal skin sensitivity and hardness whatever…….that REM can produce differences of gain or loss to the targets that can be so subtle but noticeable to the experienced patient is suspect.
To me it’s no wonder there are differences of opinion in the Audiology world concerning the effectiveness of the procedure’s usefulness.

I’m exhausted about all this though trying to get the most out of these aids as possible. The most likely outcome doing REM will have improbable results with my absolutely terrible speech scores and profound loss that I’m thinking it’s not worthwhile but at the same time why not try.

I like all the new tech the Oticon Reals provide me but better hearing in all situations is only a very small bonus. See my audiogram and my preference for discreetness as I am retired and have no need to communicate earning a living.
Thanks.

@Bucco said:

You also implied that REM might not make that much difference in your case, and you may be right. …So for me, REM made a huge difference, but then my hearing loss is a pretty straight forward ski slope loss ending at 65db, which maybe could make a difference?

In general, according to many posters here, both users and HCPs alike, REM seems to make a difference to them and their patients because the aids tend to underperform to target for the most part, statistically speaking.

But I just want to chime and and say that while I agree that REM is definitely a best practice and should be done, it doesn’t automatically imply that without REM, you will always get a subpar performance no matter what. It depends on many factors, depending on not just the performance of your hearing aids, but also the ear canal shape and size, the fitting, and also the type of hearing loss.

But I do appreciate that @Bucco here qualifies very well and carefully that REM made a big difference to him, but then his hearing loss is not as severe as @mstrmac in the first place. So this is well placed acknowledgement of differences that may or may make REM more or less necessary. But because you just don’t know how much of a difference REM can make for you, it’s still best to do it at least one time to know so that if you change your fitting for some reason, it can help you determine whether you think it’s still important to get REM done again or not, considering the situation you’re in.

If you have an audi that always includes REM as part of their best practices without extra charges each time REM needs to be redone, then for sure you want REM to be redone each time. But let’s say if it costs you $300 each time to get REM done, and you have very bad hearing loss like @mstrmac that this factor overwhelms all the other variables that would affect REM, then that should be factored into the consideration.

I purchased my Reals from an audiologist in Denmark and it’s been more cost effective to do this (Aids, with moulds etc and four years’ warranty £3,000) but they don’t do REM. I have had REM for each fitting previously, and especially due to a complete change in fitting (going from BTEs to MiniRITEs), I’m getting REM done at the end of this month with an audiologist in the UK (£150) once I have my skeleton moulds to replace the canal ones I am currently wearing.

I have had some vibrations at the end of sounds or words occasionally, so not sure if any frequency bands need adjusting or not particularly in the low frequencies, especially as these have more bass than my Opns did, so I’m glad I have arranged for this. Not sure if you know what I am talking about?

When I had REM done for my Opns, the first fitting Oticon did via Genie 2 was very close to the REM so hopefully it’ll be similar for the Reals.

@MDB said:

The Mores were BT 5.1 so it seems unlikely the Reals regressed.

I downloaded the “Instructions for Use” for the Real miniRITE aids. The FCC ID given in that document is the same as the FCC ID given in the document of the same name for my More 1 miniRITE aids. So I expect (but don’t know) that the same radio is used in both aids so it would make sense that the Bluetooth version is the same.

That is also my understanding, it seems that Oticon updated the processor and add the sudden sound prevention and the wind noise reduction to make speech more understandable in both instances. When I worked my way through the technical data that is all that I can find as the difference.