Well that seems to simplify the choice. Yes, I know the feature set and design are not identical. But if a KS10 can be fitted and perform their function in correcting your individual hearing loss then, IMHO, that’s how I would choose to go. Of course if it weren’t sufficient for the job, I would look for another solution (maybe another brand at Costco or compare to what specialized need I had which working with a private audiologist would be more suitable).
As to Phonak cannibalizing sales of the Paradise 90’s I expect they recognize that they would not be making sales to people who are opting for KS in the first place. That’s a dramatic price differential, and one a good number of people could never afford. It’s also a way to increase unit sales and getting a marketing perspective on individuals who may well be tempted to go the or even route. So even if the features and even performance were less in a KS10, it likely meets the needs of a good number of people out there, and they already have their assembly line established where the price differential between the large guaranteed Costco bulk commitments are sufficient to offset the lower volume of sales through individual private practices.
In my view, it may be wrong for a Costco hearing specialist to say their KS10 is the same as a Paradise 90, because there are obvious differences, but to say they are based on the same software and hardware with some features unavailable (I guess the tinnitus setting might be one example) id s fair representation. And at the end of the process the customer walks away with a pair of that perform well for them is the best outcome you can hope for. Would I consider them (or their by then next next next generation) in 4 or 5 years if my Starkey’s die or my hearing loss significantly changes that they are no longer a good solution.
I thought to prove that I wasn’t making this stuff up, that I’d provide one of several articles that I’ve read on FCC certification and reusing certified RF modules in devices, where the RF involved would be 2.4 GHz -like RF in devices (plus any processor emissions). You can actually buy a pre-certified module from another company and use it or, instead, design your own module and reuse it, which is undoubtedly what Phonak is doing with the Paradise and the KS10. If the intentional RF emission is basically the same from device type to device type and unintentional RF emission and body exposure RF fall within allowed limits, it seems you’re good to go on reusing your original device certification. It seems from reading the article Q&A that the FCC likes the RF modules to be separate from the rest of the device and not built into one big circuit board to easily allow certification reuse. So basically same FCC ID just means same intentional RF emission and acceptable unintentional RF emission and RF human body exposure, not necessarily the exact same device otherwise, AFAIK.
Article discussing the economics of designing and FCC certifying your own RF module vs. using another company’s pre-certified device:
Intro quote: In this post, I want to persuade you that if you design multiple products containing similar RF transmitters, designing and certifying your own RF module is one of the best ways to save $10,000+ and 1 month time to market per product.
Edit_Update: In favor of the argument that the whole electronic units of the Paradise and KS10 are functionally the same, the FCC ID of each, KWC-MRP, does not meet the labeling requirements for reusing a separate RF module within a device, i.e., using the word “contains” - such as in “Contains Transmitter Module FCC ID: ABC12345” or “Contains FCC ID: ABC12345.” (section on RF documentation in cited article. Article was in 2014 but article Q&A carry thru 2021).
At the risk of getting too deep into the weeds, I have been influenced by a document filed with the FCC for the Marvel series. I have not seen similar for the Paradise. I added the highlighting.
So Phonak has a history of selling physically identical aids at different price points. I wouldn’t be surprised if they took the same approach to the Paradise (90,70,50,30) and to the KS10s. But I do not know this to be the case.
There’s precedent for things like that. Intel used to (probably still does but I haven’t bothered to find out their most recent approaches) take a wafer of chips, and in testing each CPU, bin them depending on performance. Those that ran coolest were bind A, the next B, and so forth. The A bin chips were the ones rated to run at the highest GHz of the product line, B a little slower and so on. Obviously the faster you run a chip the hotter it gets so this let them vary the models by speed, otherwise it’s the same CPU. It’s the basis for over clocking your CPU, so long as you use more aggressive cooling, you can run as fast if not faster than the higher GHz CPU for less money. You can also take their top of the line and push it 10% faster (or more) without a penalty so long as you provide adequate cooling.
So the idea of the same hardware but turning on more features for the higher priced models is hardly new. I mean, are they really going to go with three runs of chips for their semiconductor contractor to make? That would require designs for three different chip lithographies to be prepared which is expensive. Go with one and adjust to the market for sales and pricing.
Using Intel as an example, in the early x86 CPUs, they would disable the floating point processor (IIRC the sx versions) to sell at a lower price point. Same chip, the processor is there just disabled. Turned out you could hack your way around that by restoring the connection on the chip ( they were still large enough to find and do it) with a pencil, placing graphite to connect that part of the chip to the rest.
No, I’m not suggesting hacking your , but I suspect it might be done if the features are only software blocked, and not hardware blocked by physically isolating parts on the chip from one another.
take as an example UNITRON, it has the same hadwer only the settings differ. Some wrote here that they could unlock additional features, but that was only temporary, i.e. it needed to be updated every 30 days for example. I don’t know what needs to be done to make it permanent? What prevents audiologists from making this permanent?
What prevents people who have Noah Link at home, for example?
Likely the lower level coding the underlying firmware is locked and difficult to “hack” to prevent the Audi, or user, from making permanent changes to the higher level programming running on the . Still, it would be odd that you could set it and then it would kick back after 30 days. I can’t think of a reason why that should happen, but I expect they have.
As to the Audi messing around like that, we’ll, I’m sure to be an authorized dealer you sign a very long contract which includes a clause to kick you out as a distributor if they catch you doing your own “upgrades” should they find out. I doubt an Audi is going to risk being blacklisted if they’re caught.
Some wrote here that they could unlock additional features, but that was only temporary, i.e. it needed to be updated every 30 days for example.
Yes that was/is Unitron Flex Trial models, used by the Audiologist clinics for trial periods at different levels, depending on your need/ability to pay.
I’m reading conflicting information on the KS10’s and whether they do or do NOT work with Roger accessories. Can anyone confirm through personal experience one way or another?
I have been influenced by a document filed with the FCC for the Marvel series. I have not seen similar for the Paradise
Great find! Perhaps you have also done so, but I found the FCC certification filing for the Paradise but for some reason, none of the listed documents have LIVE links on the FCC site, i.e., ones that bring up the referenced documents, even though Phonak has requested only a few documents be kept confidential. OET List Exhibits Report (fcc.gov)1
WARNING: the fccid.io site is filled with all sorts of ads, some of them salacious, like barely clad? women, and various download come-ons. It is not an official U.S. gov’t FCC site.
Found the following in the Test Report document - no mention of KS10. But what is the Phonak Audeo DPM-R model? In this doc, Phonak only states that the Paradise models are only equivalent in safety related and radiofrequency related parts, perhaps opening the door to model differentiation in other ways? MRP Hearing aid with wireless connectivity Test Report Sonova USA . (fccid.io)1
There’s precedent for things like that. Intel used to (probably still does but I haven’t bothered to find out their most recent approaches) take a wafer of chips, and in testing each CPU, bin them depending on performance.
Good thought! I was wondering the same myself particularly related to tinnitus management and remote assistance, which Costco typically didn’t offer in the past. I was wondering if chips that turned out to be not so great for these features could still be used in Costco ’s for all the different brands but it didn’t seem like these features would take up enough chip space or perhaps even require any special circuity that gave enough of a “yield” of OK for Costco but not for our premium brand chips to use. I think oetbyg’s find of just finding ways to defeature things to justify price points is perhaps closest to what’s going on. But perhaps Phonak’s language in the Test Report for the Paradise that the models tested are only exactly the same in the safety and RF related domains should carry some weight, too.
Edit_Update: Some success at the FCC site. I did a search on the KWC grantee designation with FCC approval between 01/01/2020 and 05/18/2021 and came up with the documents for KWC-MPR with the model tested being Audeo DPM-R. OET List Exhibits Report (fcc.gov)2
AND, while not for Paradise, an FCC declaration of hardware equivalence for all levels of Phonak Naida from P90-PR on down: OET List Exhibits Report (fcc.gov)1 See “Product Equality Declaration” - cannot post a direct link to this database item. And quoted below is Phonak’s statement in hardware equivalence letter of what actual model differences are:
The differences between the basis product and the equivalent product are the marketing product
name and a set of audiological features per performance level realized through the firmware.
BTW, just to generalize what’s going on here between Costco HA’s and OEM brand models. for ReSound, the Quattro, the Preza, and the Beltone version all have the same FCC ID: X26LXR45 and just looking at the output specs for Beltone - MP receiver, Models: AMZ1763-DRWC, AMZ963-DRWC, AMZ663-DRWC, they are identical to the last decimal place compared to the MP Receiver output on the ReSound Quattro. The maximum output and full-on and reference test gain curves for Beltone vs. ReSound are identical, too. So one could always argue that the fitting algorithms differ or the material durability are better for the OEM premium brands but otherwise it does seem like one could just look for related brands that are less expensive but have the same FCC ID. KS10’s vs Phonak Paradises. Given the cost difference, I am certainly willing to make my next choice of HA the KS10 rather than the Paradise. Waiting to see what’s in Phonak’s next premium HA offering, though!
These hearing aids switch to automatic program (which I cannot tolerate) every time my phone goes to sleep mode. I have the app downloaded I have some a program(office program) that I love and prefer and as long as I have my phone open and awake it will stay in this program, but a soon as the phone sleeps the app automatically switches to the automatic program. Every time. Is there a way around this. Someway to make my office program a default or to stay on what I select?
I have an iphone x. I can set it on tv mode and it stays. Phone goes black and I have to face id to use it. It is still on tv mode. I wondering if your office program is a temp program. Costco, I understand can upgrade a self made program for you so it would act like my tv mode. Hope that helps I am new to this.
Custom programs defaulting back to automatic is a known issue. There’s talk that it may be corrected in version 5 of the MyPhonak app. Don’t know if that will apply to KS10 or not. I’d suggest showing your hearing aid fitter what you’ve got in your custom program and see if he can change the automatic program to approximate it.
Your fitter will be able to do what @MDB suggests. In my case I modified the Music custom program close to what I needed and then the fitter changed some necessary settings to fine tune it.
She then saved the Music program as a permanent user selected program so if I selected to use it , it would stay selected and not drop back to Autosense as people complain about. Then she copied all of these settings for this new Music program to the Music program that Autosense uses.
In this way I always get the settings that work for me whether I manually select Music, or Autosense does it on its own.
I am about ready to spring for a pair of KS10.0 aids. I started off with KS4.0 aids (made by Rexton) and bought a used remote and transmitter from a family member. Then I moved up to a pair KS7.0 aids and added the SmartConnect BT device, which is very useful but has only about a 3hr battery life per charge – and I can’t just hook up a battery pack to keep it charged, because that turns everything off. So the claimed battery life when streaming with the KS10.0 aids will be a great advantage.
Audi at Costco called Phonak support to confirm KS 10 is compatible with Roger devices but Costco is not selling nor provides any support to Roger devices .TV connector was back ordered by 3 weeks
That 3hr battery life on the SmartConnect is when I am streaming from the TV via BlueTooth. It lasts much longer when I am simply using it as a remote.
Called my nearest Costco Hearing Center today, and found that the earliest appointment I can get is July 31! The Costco at the other end of town might have an earlier slot, but I don’t want to keep having to drive the extra miles.
Croatia
Oticonian/Disposablyte