Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Seeking Implant Recommendation: Med-El Sonnet 2 Vs Cochlear Nucleus 7

24 replies1.4k viewsLast reply

Jump
Link to this topic
Reply

Hey All! My 2 year old son has been diagnosed with profound hearing loss and is due for cochlear implantation by end of June’25. The hospital has given me two options for processors, Med-El SONNET 2 and Cochlear Nucleus 7S. I am aware that both these devices are of older generation but I don’t have a choice as newer versions are not available in my country at the moment.
I have searched a lot but am yet to reach a decision. I have heard that both devices are at par with each other with Nucleus 7S offering better connectivity options with improved battery life while Med-El SONNET 2 is slightly better sounding due to its edge on electrode driver and array length.

Also, there has been a recent discussion regarding the Nucleus 7 support being discontinued in Jan’26, so that raises some concern.

Need guidance on what to choose for my boy.

Appreciate the community’s input in this regard.

7 people in this conversation11 min readJump to latest

All three companies will sound the same.
Connectivity and support is key.

From Cochlear…
Please be assured that any existing warranties extending beyond the end-of-support date will still be honored in accordance with the warranty terms.

Edited

I agree with @Raudrive on the companies you have been offered. They are both good sound wise.

You also need to look at the ongoing costs of replacement spare parts. I know the Sonnet 2 doesn’t direct stream you need to have an to do this. I’ve read here on the forum from one of our members @Dani has had to replace this device several times.

The N7 I had direct streams (no extra devise needed) but I’m not sure on the N7S. You would need to check this out with the Cochlear representative in your country.

Ring/email both companies and see if you can set up a video call so you can ask for all the info that you need. Especially about the discontinued N7 parts what happens to you if you choose the N7S. It could be different in your country.

All these replacement spare parts cost money, and they are not cheap either.

Good luck with your decision making for you son.

@SRR said:

don’t have a choice as newer versions are not available in my country at the moment.

Hello SRR,
that surprises me. Because from the manufacturer you only get the processors of the new generation. They keep the old ones themselves to have a replacement for existing patients for a few years
If your outdated processor is going defective in let’s say 6 years then you won’t get a replacement any more and you have to buy a new one/new generation.

@SRR said:

Med-El SONNET 2 is slightly better sounding due to its edge on electrode driver and array length.

This is not relevant for a 2-year old kid. The child does not “remember” how low frequencies used to sound. His hearing center (brain) is going to learn sounds “from scratch”.

So if there really is no chance to get an actual generation then I would go for N7. In your son’s case I don’t see the benefit of long electrode arrays. But I see the disadvantage of not having direct streaming and bad rechargeable/battery life.

And yes, Deaf_piper is right: In the past I had to replace the extra adapter for direct streaming several times - meanwhile I don’t use it any more because of its non-function.

@SRR I also read on an Australian support group last night, that it’s only in North America that the discontinuation of the N7 is happening. So do check this out with the Cochlear representative in your country.

If your child needs frequent scans of their head then the Med-EL implant is a better option as it can tolerate higher strength MR without magnet removal.

Other than this both implant systems will be suitable for a flat profound hearing loss and have good long-term cumulative reliability in children.

Connectivity is a bit easier for apple devices with cochlear ltd sound processors. Both have the option of design-integrated roger receivers, but the med-EL option seems to be better integrated for a child of this age.

@Hearing_Potential said:

If your child needs frequent scans of their head then the Med-EL implant is a better option as it can tolerate higher strength MR without magnet removal.

This statement is incorrect.
Both Cochlear and MedEl are rated the same at 1.5 and 3 without removing the magnet.

It still comes down to support and connectivity which I would lean towards Cochlear in these departments.

Edited

Cochlear have the following disclaimer attached to their compatibility statement which applies only to the newest Nucleus® Profile™ Plus series implant.

*MRI compatibility may vary by country depending on regulatory approvals in each country. Please check the MRI guidance provided in your country by contacting your local Cochlear representative or clinic before proceeding with an MRI scan.

Earlier generation products had a different magnet design that needed removal for 3 Tesla MR scans.

Med-EL “offer a lifelong, worldwide MRI guarantee*** for hearing implants.” They’ve had the same magnet design that re-orients depending on the direction of magnetic field for a long time.

As we don’t know where the poster is located or which implant generation their son will receive I’ll stick by my statement to be safe.

@Hearing_Potential said:

Earlier generation products had a different magnet design that needed removal for 3 Tesla MR scans.

If you read up on Cochlear Nucleus implants you will learn they are 1.5 T and 3.0 T compliant. I do know that the my 2020 and 2021 CI612 Nucleus implants are to these standards. So these 5+ year old implants that are not the latest and greatest Cochlear implants are 1.5 and 3.0 T MRI compliant. The Cochlear implants before my implants were as you say, different magnets. I really don’t know if a surgeon could even get their hands on one to implant at this time.

The CI600 series implants became available in June of 2019.

I am not telling the OP to not use MedEl which is a fine company as are and Cochlear.

The OP needs to talk to the surgeon who has experience with . They are a wealth of information.

Thanks for the links. Lots of great information.

It reminds me of when I got my first and how I was overwhelmed with all the technical information. Much of which I didn’t understand without really digging and studying. I think most people getting a CI or who are responsible for someone getting a CI as the OP is can get caught up in this. I finally threw my hands up and trusted those with experience. This has proven to be a wise decision for me.

This is why I keep going back to CI support. When the dust settles after the surgery and activation it all comes down to support. Which company will help you when you need it. For me I deal directly with Cochlear., not my audiologist. They have been absolutely wonderful in so many ways.

@SRR try not to get wrapped up in the technical stuff. Dani gave you first hand valuable information.

@Raudrive again we have wrong information about ’s, that is not at all helpful to the OP. It amazes me that people don’t fact check first.

What @Dani wrote is so very true in regards to a child being implanted with the longer arrays. It’s very valuable info at that.

Thank you @Bimodal_user for those very useful links.

Cochlear Nucleus system has not had a recall since 2011.
Whereas Advanced Bionics have had published recalls in 2011, 2019 & 2020.

In reply to @Dani

@Dani said:

In your son’s case I don’t see the benefit of long electrode arrays. But I see the disadvantage of not having direct streaming and bad rechargeable/battery life.

I don’t know what you mean by that opinion, but I would like to leave information that the size of the cochlea in a child is the same as after achieving adolescence (if we talk about the same person).

@Bimodal_user said:

I don’t know what you mean by that opinion

My understanding of what Dani said is the 2 year old has not learned speech so he doesn’t know or have a past speech memory to remember. For this reason the 2 year old would not benefit from a longer electrode.

This is from Dani having MedEl implants. Bluetooth connectivity has been a big issue. An intermediate device is needed to stream with MedEl and that device has been problematic. Also MedEl battery life has been poor. Maybe MedEl has fixed these things, I don’t know.

Maybe Dani will reply and clear this up. He’s a knowledgeable guy. His post is not really opinion, it’s experience.

In reply to @Raudrive

If it were solely down to the implant specifications I’d agree with you. What is permitted is also dependent on the local regulatory environment. You’ve provided information about the implants which is helpful but because of different regulatory environments what is theoretically possible may not apply in the OP’s jurisdiction. It’s worthwhile knowing about this and talking to the local representatives when making a decision.

For example, the approved candidacy criteria for receiving implants of different types including minimum age of implantation still differs between manufacturers and for the same manufacturer products between different countries. Much of this is down to the cost of getting candidacy criteria expanded within certain regulatory regimes.

Thanks everyone for your valued feedback!

@Deaf_piper said:

Ring/email both companies and see if you can set up a video call so you can ask for all the info that you need.

I have checked from distributors of both manufacturers and below is the combination being offered
For Cochlear: Nucleus 7S Processor with CI522 Implant
For Med-El: Sonnet 2 Processor with Sonata 2 Implant

These older generations are being offered as they are economical. The price difference of N7S to N8 is approx 3 times. Similar is the case with Sonnet.

@Hearing_Potential said:

If your child needs frequent scans of their head then the Med-EL implant is a better option as it can tolerate higher strength MR without magnet removal.

From my understanding, the Cochlear CI522 is compatible for 1.5T with MRI kit in place and 3.0T with magnet removed, whereas the Sonata 2 is MRI ready up to 3.0T without the need of magnet removal due to self-rotating magnets. Generally, MRI at 1.5T is sufficient for majority of clinical tests.

@Raudrive said:

My understanding of what Dani said is the 2 year old has not learned speech so he doesn’t know or have a past speech memory to remember. For this reason the 2 year old would not benefit from a longer electrode.

The argument is very valid as I’ve also heard in some cases the inner most electrodes may need to be turned off/adjusted to minimize the risk of complications or unwanted sounds.

Edited

Glad to know the information was helpful. You may find the design-integrated Roger receiver for the Med-EL Sonnet sound processor to be better integrated than that for the Nucleus 7 and thus harder to lose. A roger system is near essential for children with ’s.

I’ve read elsewhere on this forum that the end of support for the Nucleus 7 sound processor is in 2026 and there was a comment that replacement microphone covers might no longer be available.

The design for the Med-EL sonnet sound processor gen 2 and 3 seems to be very similar so you might have more luck with parts in the long-term if purchasing an older CI system for cost savings. Again, I would recommend discussing this with the distributor to make sure whichever device you choose will be well supported.

If you’re going through a Roger system for connectivity you don’t need to worry as much about changes in other audio streaming standards in consumer electronics devices so long as you can get access to a 3.5mm audio jack. For a two year old this is an appropriate solution that will remain appropriate well into primary school. At some point the sound processor will reach its end of life and money should be set aside for a replacement sound processor which will undoubtedly offer better connectivity than what is on offer right now.

If electroacoustic stimulation were desired the Med-EL Sonnet 2 with a soft earmold is more appropriate for a two year old than the cochlear options which to my knowledge use a receiver in the ear for sound delivery.

@Bimodal_user said:

Does your child will have a hybrid solution? I ask because of Nucleus 7S mentioned.

As per assessment, a hybrid solution would not be feasible as the child suffers from profound hearing loss and shows no response while using hearing aids. @Hearing_Potential So EAS would not be desired.

@Hearing_Potential said:

You may find the design-integrated Roger receiver for the Med-EL Sonnet sound processor to be better integrated than that for the Nucleus 7 and thus harder to lose

@Hearing_Potential That’s good info, was not aware of this. The design integrated system would be well suited for a child.

Related discussions