My Experience with the Sony CRE E-10

C-20 released, haven’t seen E-20 yet.

I have the E-10, thought they would be good for backups but I seem to be wearing then more as primary aids. They sound as good as my new Phonaks and better for music. But, the limited Bluetooth is a problem for me.

@Psych1 said:

C-20 released, haven’t seen E-20 yet.

Oops! Yes, you’re right. But I expect that an E-20 is on its way some time this fall.

Unfortunately IX platform retains the same BT chip of AX platform with all of its limits. I’m quite certain that there are no hardware changes for IX platform at all, just software.
I was planning to get them as backups too, but it’s hard to justify over AX version. I’ll wait for next gen.

I agree. I’ve worn both the AX and the IX. I didn’t notice much of a difference. In some ways I preferred the AX - at least initially.

This was discussed some time ago, and I no longer have access to all the details. The chip is the same; otherwise, they would have had to re-certify it with the Bluetooth SIG, which they didn’t. At the time, this information was publicly available via Bluetooth Studio, but it has since been closed.

I’m also a developer who works directly with these devices, and I have no reason to believe they differ in any way. Additionally, as I’ve mentioned before, Signia’s developers left a poorly hidden menu in the phone app that allows you to probe the devices (and the app itself) for additional information.

I have a small suspicion that they’re not fully LE Audio compatible, but will have to dig a bit before confirming.

On a side note, I’m a Signia user myself, but I have to say, their software stack is an utter pile of crap—everything from the phone app to the fitting software. Even though I like the devices, this will strongly influence my next choice.

@pmc1978 said:

The IX platform will support Bluetooth LE Audio and Auracast when the new firmware arrives.
It can’t have the same BT chip as the AX.

Who told you that? It’s absolutely not true, it’s a matter of firmware not hardware, the requirement is that the base hardware is already BT 5 of course, which it is.

It’s nothing new, they’ve been doing it for a long time, and it’s not unique to Signia. Artificialy creating level tiers and generations with small software (and overhyped) changes.
Do you think that 3, 5 and 7 levels have some hardware differences too?

@Reginald said:

Signia’s developers left a poorly hidden menu in the phone app that allows you to probe the devices (and the app itself) for additional information.

It would be interesting to see that hidden menu. How do you access it?

@Reginald said:

I have a small suspicion that they’re not fully LE Audio compatible, but will have to dig a bit before confirming.

Wow, really?

I’m about to purchase new hearing aids.
Would you recommend ditching Signia/Rexton IX/Reach for the Oticon/Philips Intent/9050?

@Reginald said:

Who told you that? It’s absolutely not true, it’s a matter of firmware not hardware, the requirement is that the base hardware is already BT 5 of course, which it is.

I saw this on a Hearing Tracker post:

At this writing, ReSound Nexia and Jabra Enhance Pro 20 are currently enabled for Auracast. Hearing aids that are “Auracast-ready” (needing only a firmware update to enable Auracast) include Signia IX, Oticon Intent, Philips 9050, Rexton Ready, as well as the JLab HEAR OTC hearing aid. For cochlear implants, the Cochlear Nucleus 8 sound processor is Auracast ready.

Auracast in Hearing Aids and Hearables: Bluetooth LE and the New Revolution...3

Auracast is a game-changer for wireless connectivity in hearing aids and hearables—and all future high-end earbuds. Here's an overview of what you need to know about Bluetooth LE and Auracast, as well as a review of the hearing aids and hearing...

In theory, Auracast requires LE Audio, which requires BT 5.3.

So the Bluettoth 5.3 chip is the same as 5.2 chip, but with more software features and no hardware differences?
They shouldn’t make a new BT version for this.

@Reginald said:

It’s nothing new, they’ve been doing it for a long time, and it’s not unique to Signia. Artificialy creating level tiers and generations with small software (and overhyped) changes.

Like Apple, the hardware specs say my MacBook has Bluetooth 5.2, but after upgrading to the latest OS it shows Bluetooth 5.3.

@Reginald said:

Do you think that 3, 5 and 7 levels have some hardware differences too?

Not at all, just disabled features.

On top of that they all have shitty accessories situation. The only ones with decent choice are Widex and Phonak with Resound updating two of theirs to LE A recently. I would wait with Widex till next generation though.
Also, IMHO Signias require either a very very good fitter or DIYing.

@Reginald said:

On top of that they all have shitty accessories situation

Well I can’t disagree, but luckily people don’t have to use them, actually the StreamLine for tv isn’t so bad ( but yeah mass production as even Oticon users it) the whole accessories “thing” needs to be dropped, this is the point of LE Audio with Auracast, unfortunately I’ve been totally disappointed with the roll out, it should be up and running everywhere by now, just taking far too long…

Oh, I agree entirely. However, I suspect they won’t give it up without a fight. Since I’m currently doing two things—firstly, developing streaming and control software for hearing devices, and secondly, planning to upgrade my own—I’m observing the whole situation unfold in great detail.

@pmc1978, I did a full trial with both the Rexton Reach and the Oticon Intent. I have settled on the Rexton Reach.

If my priority were speech in the most challenging, noisy situations, Oticon Intent wins hands down. Their technology is simply amazing at separating speech from noise in these most challenging situations.

But as my life is organized right now, speech in the most difficult noisy situations is not my priority. And when I am in those situations, it’s not critical that I hear and understand the maximum amount possible.

What surprised me in my trial with the Intent is that it gave me no advantage in ordinary, everyday conversation where I continue to miss words. Even after being adjusted by the audiologist, based on my experience in the trial.

What bith shared in common was a pleasant, accurate rendition of normal environmental sounds and speech. Both provided a normal rendition of my own voice even with closed domes.

I am pleased with my choice of the Rexton Reach (Signia Pure C&G IX). It does what I need it to do. I still miss some words just as I did with the Intent, but I believe that is an issue with my hearing loss is going to be able to correct. I certainly wasn’t going to pay $5000 for the intent vs $1500 for the Reach. It was simply not worth the difference for me.

If speech comprehension in the most noisy, challenging situations were critical for me, I would spend the additional money on the Intent without hesitation. It is excellent.

I see Oticon and Philips being equated at times in this conversation. I have not seen any evidence that the Intent and the 9050 are equivalent. I have trialed half a dozen hearing aids in the past year, so I encourage you to trial as many as you need to. It’s just that I would treat the Intent and the 9050 as two separate hearing aids and not equivalent.

I would also encourage you to listen to your body. What works well for one of us dies not necessarily work as well for another. What matters is what works for you.

@Reginald said:

That’s a different matter. If you’re considering moving to RICs it will be a significant upgrade no matter what you’ll pick. I would try both Signias and Oticons [or their Costco counterparts].

Will do. I’m excited to give the RICs another try. I think I will benefit from the extra power and features.

I tried some RICs (Pure 7P) in 2008 and they were awful. The earmolds were huge and uncomfortable. I also didnt like placing the phone above my ear to talk.
So I went back to CICs.

I’ll try both the Rexton Reach and Philips 9050.

@billgem said:

If my priority were speech in the most challenging, noisy situations, Oticon Intent wins hands down. Their technology is simply amazing at separating speech from noise in these most challenging situations.

But as my life is organized right now, speech in the most difficult noisy situations is not my priority. And when I am in those situations, it’s not critical that I hear and understand the maximum amount possible

My life is far from organized

I usually meet my friends in restaurants, bars, or concerts, so I’d like to be able to hear in those places.

I also take long flights (12+ hours), so I need to hear in those situations as well (planes, airports, taxis, trains, stations). In this scenario, the Reach wins as their battery life is great.

Don’t the Reach work well in these situations?

@billgem said:

I certainly wasn’t going to pay $5000 for the intent vs $1500 for the Reach. It was simply not worth the difference for me.

I reside in South America, and it is unfeasible to obtain the most recent technology at reasonable prices.
Phonak carries tech from 2018.
Philips carries the 9010.
Signia carries the Styletto 5AX, and it costs $8,200/pair
Oticon is the only one that carries the latest tech (Intent 1), but it costs $11,000/pair.
No trials, no refunds, no L&D insurance and the warranty is only 1 year.
Custom earmolds are made locally at some workshop and their quality isn’t great, unlike the US where the manufacturer itself makes the earmolds.

It doesn’t make sense to buy them here, so I need to go to the US for some weeks.
Costco takes about 1 week to have them in store, so my trial period would be 1-2 weeks. They must also order custom earmolds from Rexton/Philips.

I’ll try to trial both the Reach and the 9050 in 10 days, as I’ll only be in the US for a short period.

@billgem said:

If speech comprehension in the most noisy, challenging situations were critical for me, I would spend the additional money on the Intent without hesitation. It is excellent.

This is causing me to question my preference for the Reach.
However, I don’t think the noise is extreme either. I have some good low frequencies, so I just reduce the volume of the hearing aids to be able to hear better in noisy places.

@billgem said:

I see Oticon and Philips being equated at times in this conversation. I have not seen any evidence that the Intent and the 9050 are equivalent. I have trialed half a dozen hearing aids in the past year, so I encourage you to trial as many as you need to. It’s just that I would treat the Intent and the 9050 as two separate hearing aids and not equivalent.

I read that somewhere in this forum. Philips and Oticon share the hardware, but not the software.

@billgem said:

I would also encourage you to listen to your body. What works well for one of us dies not necessarily work as well for another. What matters is what works for you.

Exactly! Thanks for your post.

Some of you might be interested in watching this lengthy marketing video about the cre c20.

The solitary comment beneath the video is mine.