Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Severe/Profound Loss At a Loss

This topic is closed.

160 replies4.7k viewsLast reply

Jump
Link to this topic
Edited

Hello,

I am aged 54 and have had a severe/profound hearing loss since birth.

From birth to age 42 in 2012, I wore analog hearing aids. These went from the body worn aids until age 9, to the until age 30, to the full shell until age 42. For all these years, yes, I was used to the analog sound that many of you older folks with similar hearing loss know very well - the volume was great, music sounded fantastic, and the crowded situations forced us to lip read.

In 2012 I was fitted with a set from Phonak with 90 db of power, my first foray into the world of digital aids. The sound was bad compared to what I was used to - very mechanical sounding - despite numerous trips to the audiologist for adjustments and setting changes. But I was enamored with the discreetness of the size, so I went with it anyways. And they were loud enough. But unfortunately music no longer sounded good. And lip reading was still needed since noise reduction features in this were very minimal.

In 2016 I trialed a for the first time, from Starkey. The sound quality of these were much, much worse. They sounded very distorted, tinny, very mechanical, and robotic. The deep bass I was used to in analogs seemed to be on vacation from these. Every adjustment and setting imaginable was tried by both the audiologist AND a Starkey engineer (that joined us via phone call for one session) - all to no avail. So I returned these and stuck with the 2012 Phonaks.

In 2017, I had to replace the Phonaks, so the audiologist and I held our breaths cautiously and tried Oticon ITCs this time (also with 90db power). And …. to our pleasant surprise sounded fantastic, even before adjustments! I was amazed, still unsure why they sounded great compared to what I’ve tried with digital up to then, but I certainly wasn’t complaining. Only a couple of trips to the audiologist was needed afterwards to tinker and button things up a bit and I was definitely set with these. I could enjoy music again! Also, while it did come with improved noise reduction features, I ended up not using them and had them completely turned off in one setting, which basically became my go to setting for everything except perhaps in a restaurant.

Unfortunately, these aids are now 7 years old, and my hearing loss is now 5 decibels worse, so I am in the market again for a new pair, probably with a need for 100-105ish db of power this time around.

So this year I tried the Starkey Genesis. Complete disaster - they sounded just as unnaturally horrible as the 2016 Starkey CICs.

I then tried the Oticon Own (hoping I’d find the same success with the 2017 Oticons), same disastrously distorted sound.

What’s more, these 2024 sets had so many features and bells and whistles, half of which couldn’t be “turned off”, that, in addition to the sound itself being bad in these, they also sounded like an annoying toddler was constantly playing around with the equalizer and volume knobs of a stereo while it was playing - making the experience all the more unnatural and unbelievably unbearable.

Look, I don’t want this to turn into an analogue vs. digital debate, as I am sure there are plenty of those in this forum. Besides, there IS hope since I have had success with one digital pair sounding just as good as the analogs I grew up with - my current 2017 Oticons.

But where to start, what to try? I don’t even know what all the settings in the data sheets for these mean.

I mean, what’s OpenSound? What’s multiband adapted directionality? What’s Speech Rescue? What’s SpeechGuard? What’s single compression and dynamic compression? What are processing channels, and so on and so forth? I tried researching these and my brain hurt. Do any of these affect anything I’ve described or not? I am clueless.

So go to my audiologist you say? Unfortunately this person has now retired (after fitting me for 25 years).

So now I’m alone in the great Wild West on this, needing to wade through all this formidable technology AND try and find an audiologist who can help me do so (in what apparently is a complete crapshoot in itself from what I hear).

So maybe a few of you can help me know what to try, help define some of the features above, and know which features to look out for and/or avoid, so at least I can gain some grip on this, especially before it’s too late and I’m stuck without aids at all in the near future.

All I know really is that I basically I want that so called “linear” sound or close to it, a sound that’s loud and deep like what I’m used to with analogs. And I want to be able to do without unneeded bells and whistles in regards to noise cancelling and AI (I’m happy just lip reading really) , or, at the very least, BE ABLE TO TURN OFF ALL AI OR NOISE REDUCTION if it comes equipped with it. I will say, though, that I do like the idea of Bluetooth so I can enjoy music without headphones this time around.

So how can I get there? What aids should I try? What features need to be adjusted and/or avoided? What works and what doesn’t work? Is there a good audiologist in San Diego?

Help!

26 people in this conversation60 min readJump to latest

@anon99509572 Welcome to the forum, I hope you will find here what you are looking for.

Do you mind telling us which country you are in, also could you add your latest so the smashing people of this forum can better help you?

Oticon Own is still a good hearing aids, not sure why you are having problems, but I hope @Volusiano can shed some lights if he can.

Have you tried Oticon’s latest hearing aids “Intent”?

Edited

Hello Baltazard, nice to meet you. I am in San Diego, CA. I’m not sure either, but every digital I’ve tried except the 2017 Oticons all sound equally as bad.

So while the Intents sound enticing, I’m wary of something that touts all the bells and whistles it has in regards to when I’m just focused on trying to find something that has a quality sound to begin with, or at least what I’m used to.

I would love to add my , but I don’t currently have it. I will try and add it Wednesday after a trip to return the Owns this Wednesday - I will ask for a copy of it then.

Edited

In reply to @anon99509572

It seems like maybe you have the Oticon OPN, can you confirm? You only said 2017, so I can only guess as such. The Oticon OPN is based on the Velox platform. The Oticon Own is based on the same platform as the More and Real → the Polaris platform. The Oticon Intent is based on the Sirius platform.

All I can suggest is that you’re really against the new generations of aids is maybe just find used Oticon OPNs on eBay and power them with 105 receivers and find an to program them for you, unless the HCP can still source the OPNs directly from Oticon for you. I understand that your OPN is already 7 years old and you want newer aids, but if you’re against the new models, there’s nothing wrong with finding the same models that you’ve only liked so far and just stick with it, then at least have 2 pairs of the same model and wear 1 pair and keep the other pair as backup, albeit with a 105 dB receivers now.

It doesn’t seem like you’re a type, and if your HCP has retired, I guess you don’t really have a choice but to find another HCP whom you might like. I think the key is to find an HCP competent enough to replace your previous and now retired HCP.

Hello Volusiano,

I’m not sure which Oticons they are, but the printing on the aid itself says N2P-1C P if that helps. The instruction manual provided with it is for Alta2, Alta, Nera2, Nera, Ria2, Ria - not sure which of these it is, if any, or if they gave that with all OPNs as well.

Regarding the three platforms you listed, have the three been compared in terms of sound quality?

While the hearing aids you like are still functioning, it would be valuable to allow your next clinicians to save the settings and the on-ear gain profile. Then they can just match new ones to that.

Hi Neville, that is the first thing I suggested, and the audiologist did so, but the sound still was much different. I think it is more than just matching the gains with each frequency. Believe me, I wish it were that simple.

Okay, now you’re speaking a different language lol. So what is ? And how, where do they adjust the compression? The audiologist just mentioned compression and said it was a bad thing, but I don’t recall her actually changing a setting specific for compression, just that it occurs in certain settings/adjustments and even attributed the poor sound quality to it.

To add, while I don’t yet have my available to post here, I will say that it is classic cookie bite shaped, with the midrange down near the 90 db level.

Widex are often touted by musicians for their natural sound. I have all the bells and whistles turned off on the musician program of my Signia AX7s. that helps a lot. It’s easy enough to do this. Have your audi contact support for the aids that you’re trialing and they can walk him or her through the steps. Just do this on one of the programs, not all, so you can compare.

I’m not sure if one widex model outperforms others in this regard. I believe Widex used to have something called “pure sound” (??) that attempted to dial back processing. The new buzzword is “smart” so the latest widex mdels call themselves smart. i worried that this means they added more features/processing but I don’t know. Widex and Signia recently merged. Their aids are different.
Again with any aid you can have your audi turn features off on one dedicated program to see if that helps. But Widex prides itself on unprocessed sound,so maybe try that brand.

Edited

In reply to @anon99509572

If I were to go about trying to identically match the sound of a previous hearing aid, I would first set up the software settings to be as identical as possible. I would then measure the output of the old hearing aids in the testbox and use that to match the output of the new hearing aids at 50, 60, and 80 as well as (maximum power output). Finally, I would measure the output of the old hearing aids on-ear then tweak the new ones to match. You could do it all on ear, I just often like doing it first in testbox because trying to get an exact match can be a bit of time-consuming a process and it’s nice not to have the patient sitting there the whole time. But you need the on-ear part to adjust for differences in acoustic coupling to the ear.

This is something that I do semi-regularly to either match a patient’s strongly preferred previous sound, as in your case, or to allow one of my patients to do a true side-by-side comparison of two different manuacturers. It’s do-able. Whether it is something that your clinician does/can do is a bit of a different question. You could just hand my suggestion to them, if you like, and see what they say. As I said, it can take some time, but particularly for a long-term severe/profound user who has specific tastes/requirements I find that it often ends up being faster than getting them in and out for multiple adjustments, assuming they were happy with their old settings.

Thank you Neville. I’ll show your suggestion to the audiologist. I would assume I need to be there for this at first, since they will need my old hearing aids to measure those outputs, and I’ll need them to wear if they want to hang on to the new ones and do all the matching you mention.

@anon99509572 said:

I’ll need them to wear if they want to hang on to the new ones and do all the matching you mention.

Your ears will need to be there, at least. :wink:

WH

Here’s a dumb question:

Would switching to a more powerful result in better sound due to a greater buffer between the maximum attainable volume and the actual gain programmed for me, and therefore less compression?

Just a thought but maybe I have no idea what I’m talking about lol.

Just my three cents…

Thank you for sharing this. It is informative in regards to the rarity and difficulties of fitting for the cookie bite type of loss.

However, my situation is even worse for two reasons, and therefore a bit different:

  1. My loss is near profound, in that I am pretty much deaf without aids, so I wasn’t able to live for decades without noticing it like this presenter was.

  2. Due to living with analogs for 42 years, I am used to over amplification of the low end frequencies and actually depend on it for better brain processing of sound as a result. So it isn’t just a matter of finding the aid that can precision match my chart to a tee. But matching it and overamifyong the bass doesn’t seem to work either, for reasons I’m not clear on (yet).

Welcome to the forum. Check my , I use a Resound Enzo Q998 and fairly happy with it. I’m not an expert so can’t tell for sure if it is suitable for you. It was introduced 3-4 years ago so I’m expecting a new model to be introduced soon (hopefully).

Related discussions