Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Please help me choose a Widex Moment model - SmartRIC vs others

16 replies540 viewsLast reply

Link to this topic
Reply

Hi all, I suffered a sudden bilateral loss out of nowhere a few months ago and now need aids. The NHS have been great on the hearing aid side of things and I consider myself fortunate to have been given/loaned a pair of Oticon Sage that seem to be well fitted. I’m using the OpenBass domes with them at the moment.

However, both listening to and making music has pretty much always been my life and I’m hoping I can do better on that front. I assume the Sages must have a fair amount of latency as I perceive more of a chorus effect (particularly in the ‘crossover’ region where the aid starts doing more work) than a comb filter one.. Though granted, I’d rather listen to a chorus than a comb filter! Analog aids not being much of a thing now, naturally this lead me to looking at Widex.

My right ear is a little outside the range for Puresound, but I think it’d still work well enough with a little adjustment at the source and I gather their universal mode is still faster than most on the market.

My question for now is: does anyone have real world experience of comparing the SmartRIC with the ‘standard’ Moment models? For music predominantly, but in general too.

Ideally I’d prefer a disposable battery model like the 312D but if the SmartRIC really does improve upon the older models in a meaningful way it might be worth sacrificing that. I do think the SmartRIC looks nicer, but that’s not really a huge factor.

Also, I assume the versions are likely to give an inferior end result to either of the above, or am I off-base with that?

Thanks :slight_smile:

6 people in this conversation8 min readJump to latest

Sound wise, the biggest difference between the 312 D and SmartRIC is the device shape and the microphone setup. The angle shape of SmartRIC is designed to help with better directionality, and the microphone cover on the SmartRIC seems to help with wind noise and feedback. For music (or really any situation) the less the hearing aid circuit needs to adjust for feedback the better.

As far as , I don’t love the idea of filling up the ear canals more than necessary given how good your low frequency hearing is. However, the processing speed should be similar, although the PureSound program is not available on Moment customs.

Clinically, I have not noticed any trends between RIC 312 D users and SmartRIC users related to music preference.

Please consider trialing the Allure which is in the standard Allure housings. Also, please not that Widex’s quoted battery lifespans are for devices that are 6 years old, so actual battery life is a lot longer when the devices are new.

The smartRICs (I have them) are part of the Moment family. They are a Moment with hardware modifications (but still a Momwbt). They have a longer battery life and a super nice portable battery charger. The Moment platform is over 6 yrs old now .

The advantages over the new Allure: tinnitus Zen program , compatibility with all Widex accessories (the Allures have a very limited number of accessories, no high frequency boost feature (which I love ) and other things. If you don’t care for any of these missing features , you may want to look at the Allure .

PureSound may not be able to provide the gain you need above 4khz because its feedback manager is super conservative.

I don’t think the Universal program is particularly better or different compared to Phonak or Signia . I rarely use it. That said , the Widex music program sounds phenomenal .

The question is : is it a good idea to buy an aid that has 6 years old technology ? You will have to try them.

@OcramSagev said:

The question is : is it a good idea to buy an aid that has 6 years old technology ? You will have to try them

Yeah this is thing, obviously it’s not a good idea, especially as new models from everyone else are being released.

I appreciate the replies, sorry I couldn't respond myself before now as I'd been having sign-in troubles on the new forum.

I'd whittled things down to the Moments based on some of the initial reports on the Allures (thanks @OcramSagev for summarising above) and the fact there's no possibility for , which makes me uncomfortable given how picky I'm liable to be over getting music as good as it can be.

I don't mind them being 'older tech' at all since really the ideal thing for music would be incredibly primitive analog EQs sat inside my ears with no real processing at all.. It seems the Widex are the closest I'm likely to get these days.

Good reminder on the not having Puresound @PaulC, I had read that and forgotten - there's a lot to take in when you're new to this stuff and it's frustrating how difficult some of it is to find out if you're someone who likes to do their research. I've also been a bit unclear on how much venting is actually possible with ITEs but I imagine they're never going to get near / on that front.

I realise that going from an earlier Moment to a SmartRIC would probably be a sideways move for most so it was unlikely I'd find anyone with much real world experience of both but it was worth a try! I know the theory behind the SmartRIC's benefits but it's hard to get a sense of how much that translates in the real world and whether it's giving up my preferred battery solution for.

In reply to @Terrier

I’ve seen comments in this where people say they can’t tell the difference between the SmartRIC and the Allure when it comes to sound (I’m referring to the current version of the Allure). I’ve never used the Allures so I cannot confirm this.

In reply to @Bimodal_user

As I mentioned earlier, the comb effect is primarily caused by the phase lag between two sound sources: the natural sound and the sound produced by the hearing aid’s receiver. When these two sounds are not aligned, they create the comb effect. If the is able to process the sound faster , the phase lag minimizes and the comb effect diminishes.

This is not something that can be fixed with venting (unless you are not using vented or open domes and the ear canal is sealed — in this case the ear canal only gets one source of sound).

In reply to @Terrier

The Allure devices also have a more advanced puresound program that includes advanced signal processing features like noise reduction and it is a lot more similar to the universal program. Moment puresound is a very simple signal processing path by comparison.

In reply to @OcramSagev

@OcramSagev said:

This is not something that can be fixed with venting

I'm sorry, but I don't agree. The comb effect is the most audible then differences between processed sound volume and unprocesses is lesser than 10-12 . This is important, because very often it is not possible to simply reduce the delay in the hearing aid.

That differences can be made larger by reducing the vent diameter among other things. That reduction makes unprocessed sound with less sound pressure level, therefore quieter than processed sound and there is bigger chance to achieve that over 10-12 dB difference.

There was interesting chapter about that issues in one of the book about hearing aids.

In reply to @Hearing_Potential

Thanks, but this is a strike in favour of the Moment for me and part of why I wasn't considering the Allures :slight_smile:

Simple, with minimal processing is the very thing that I'm looking for here. I wouldn't want to trust any algorithm/'' with knowing what constitutes 'noise' with regard to music. Especially when making music, when I need to hear exactly what is going on (within the limits of my hearing and now, at least).

'Noise music' is a genre in itself that I happen to listen to and who knows what it would make of that!

Edited

In reply to @Bimodal_user

Yes , we disagree.

You can’t fix latency with venting, especially when we are talking about Widex and PureSound .

And yas, you can reduce the phase lag of a hearing aid . This is exactly what Widex PureSound does.

it’s a matter of physics : you can’t align two waves (or minimize the lag between them) with venting: of the waves has to shift.

have you used the Widex PureSound ?

@OcramSagev said:

You can’t fix latency with venting, especially when we are talking about Widex and PureSound .

Indeed, we can't. What I wanted to point out is that there are situations and opportunities to make comb effect clinically negligible despite its existence. That can be achieved by reducing intensity of unprocessed sound by vent reduction.

@OcramSagev said:

have you used the Widex PureSound ?

No, never, I have too severe hearing loss for it. My last Widex was Inteo over 10 years ago.

Edited

In reply to @Bimodal_user

@Bimodal_user said:

That can be achieved by reducing intensity of unprocessed sound by vent reduction.

But this defeats the whole purpose of Puresound. Some people want the unprocessed sound to be maximized: This is what musicians and people who appreciate natural sound want and they are the target of Puresound. Also, the programming software disables puresound when closed or power sleeves are used (there is a minimum amount of venting required for Puresound to be enabled).

Are there instances where you want the ear canal closed (vent minimized): Of course (e.g. speech in loud noise). Puresound does not excel in this type of environments. In this case, you switch to the Universal program , which is the "equivalent" of using Phonak AutoSense.

Some of us do not like anything that is not a well vented dome and, for us, Puresound is a good approach.

@OcramSagev said:

But this defeats the whole purpose of Puresound. Some people want the unprocessed sound to be maximized: This is what musicians and people who appreciate natural sound want and they are the target of Puresound.

I absolutely do not deny it. My post was aimed at giving one of the solutions to the OP's problem. Will it be the best? I absolutely do not say so...! It's simply the way that's worth considering to at least try.

Given that PureSound is for mild to moderate hearing loss, it's not a solution for everyone, so it's always nice to have another tool in the box.

I wouldn't be categorical about statement that the best low frequency sound are unprocessed. Okay, given limited sampling rate, also in Phonak Infinio (24 kHz?), that's indeed a case, much better situation is with Widex 33 kHz sampling rate.

But when I tried my cShell with 1mm vent occluded by guitar string - I have not perceived deterioration of played guitar music by myself. Or - that deterioration occurred, but wasn't much meaningful.

Related discussions