Here
From the Hearing Review. Explanation of how more care is required when dealing with severe-profound losses, both in terms of loudness and the avoidance of hearing aid sound artefacts like distortion, compression issues and feedback.
Friday, 20 April 2012
Wednesday, 18 April 2012
Moxi Pro and Unitron Micro
Friday 13th: Not a bad launch......
I attended the Unitron launch at Heathrow. This was a pretty reasonable affair to update the Moxi range and the BTE's as well as add a couple more products in ITE.
Looks like Unitron have undertaken a fairly significant look at the ERA platform and it's underpinnings: I'm assuming this will be like the Spice-Spice + revision recently undertaken by Phonak. As it turns out the the new Moxi PRO benefits from the full array beamforming technology as part of the Automatic package rather than a discrete dispenser-selectable program. This is full spatial mapping as vaulted by Starkey, but I suspect in a better looking and better featured overall package.
Apparently the aids are now able to track principal voice sources bilaterally and beam-form onto them to the exclusion of background noise. Most of the presentation was light on actual improvements, but the ability of the aids to identify speech in noise was pretty good. Transitions to other sounds and music also sounded pretty effective during the demonstration. Moxi Pro's are ONLY sold as pairs, if you want one, you get a bog-standard Moxi. The technology is also available across the larger BTE (Quantum) range too.
Also new were some high power ITE models to strengthen the offering, but far more relevant was the introduction of the Micro - one of the smallest IIC I've seen. It's claimed to be smaller than the Phonak Nano, through a couple of neat touches and the smallest transducers available. I'm not going to quite agree with the 50% claimed volume reduction of transducers, but the receiver was the thinnest device I've ever seen - which makes me suspect that it doesn't use conventional coil technology at all, but panel excitation like the founding technology behind the Otolens. This essentially uses current to manipulate a crystalline surface quite rapidly - sort of like the way the numerals work on a digital watch. It's not capable of moving vast volumes of air, but it will move it quite quickly with lowish voltages: so assuming your residual canal volume is not too high (like an IIC) you can get enough pressure to make sound waves. Interestingly enough, this establishes the possibility of a wipe/clean back 'face' to future IIC aids which will simply remove lots of the issues we currently experience with wax.
And, to top it all off, Rula Lenska (the actress) gave an address thanking Unitron for their support with the latest products, which was quite encouraging.
I attended the Unitron launch at Heathrow. This was a pretty reasonable affair to update the Moxi range and the BTE's as well as add a couple more products in ITE.
Looks like Unitron have undertaken a fairly significant look at the ERA platform and it's underpinnings: I'm assuming this will be like the Spice-Spice + revision recently undertaken by Phonak. As it turns out the the new Moxi PRO benefits from the full array beamforming technology as part of the Automatic package rather than a discrete dispenser-selectable program. This is full spatial mapping as vaulted by Starkey, but I suspect in a better looking and better featured overall package.
Apparently the aids are now able to track principal voice sources bilaterally and beam-form onto them to the exclusion of background noise. Most of the presentation was light on actual improvements, but the ability of the aids to identify speech in noise was pretty good. Transitions to other sounds and music also sounded pretty effective during the demonstration. Moxi Pro's are ONLY sold as pairs, if you want one, you get a bog-standard Moxi. The technology is also available across the larger BTE (Quantum) range too.
Also new were some high power ITE models to strengthen the offering, but far more relevant was the introduction of the Micro - one of the smallest IIC I've seen. It's claimed to be smaller than the Phonak Nano, through a couple of neat touches and the smallest transducers available. I'm not going to quite agree with the 50% claimed volume reduction of transducers, but the receiver was the thinnest device I've ever seen - which makes me suspect that it doesn't use conventional coil technology at all, but panel excitation like the founding technology behind the Otolens. This essentially uses current to manipulate a crystalline surface quite rapidly - sort of like the way the numerals work on a digital watch. It's not capable of moving vast volumes of air, but it will move it quite quickly with lowish voltages: so assuming your residual canal volume is not too high (like an IIC) you can get enough pressure to make sound waves. Interestingly enough, this establishes the possibility of a wipe/clean back 'face' to future IIC aids which will simply remove lots of the issues we currently experience with wax.
And, to top it all off, Rula Lenska (the actress) gave an address thanking Unitron for their support with the latest products, which was quite encouraging.
Tuesday, 10 April 2012
Wednesday, 4 April 2012
Phonak Spice - Technical background.
After fitting the Spice and now Spice +, I chanced on this PDF from Phonak, covering the underpinning technology and features of the Spice system. Worth a read to get the gist of everything that is going on.
Here
The extra refinement of Spice + seems to have improved the timbre and initial user acceptance of the aid too. From a dispensing point of view, you have to ask whether the level of technology now available exceeds what can be understood by the average wearer (and average dispenser) to such an extent that they will never fully utilise some/most of the features. Yet the aid is still just as susceptible to basic 'plumbing failures' - wax blockage, mic screen issues, condensation - as it ever was. Even the H2O versions claims about water-proofing come with a caveat that you can still block the filters and the receiver units.
Here
The extra refinement of Spice + seems to have improved the timbre and initial user acceptance of the aid too. From a dispensing point of view, you have to ask whether the level of technology now available exceeds what can be understood by the average wearer (and average dispenser) to such an extent that they will never fully utilise some/most of the features. Yet the aid is still just as susceptible to basic 'plumbing failures' - wax blockage, mic screen issues, condensation - as it ever was. Even the H2O versions claims about water-proofing come with a caveat that you can still block the filters and the receiver units.
Friday, 23 March 2012
What has happened to Panasonic Hearing in the UK.
Just another small note, it seems like Panasonic has basically disappeared from the Hearing Aid market in the UK. Googling them just yields a couple of likes to product listed through companies like Hidden Hearing holding some legacy product from them - nothing about the new #13 battery RIC from any of the major suppliers.
It's all in stark contrast to the USA where, under the tenure of Delain Wright, they seem to have got off the ground in some way or another. I guess their presence at the AAA next week will show their intent. I'm wondering if this is a reflection of Delain's experience in both the US domestic market (and previously Europe).
So, Panasonic, if you want to start again in the UK with proper branded distribution centres - give me a call ;-)
Would the last person leaving Guilford please turn the lights out.......
It's all in stark contrast to the USA where, under the tenure of Delain Wright, they seem to have got off the ground in some way or another. I guess their presence at the AAA next week will show their intent. I'm wondering if this is a reflection of Delain's experience in both the US domestic market (and previously Europe).
So, Panasonic, if you want to start again in the UK with proper branded distribution centres - give me a call ;-)
Would the last person leaving Guilford please turn the lights out.......
Floating Point Linearity - my best layman's terms explanation.
This came up on the Hearing Aid Forums recently - after a bit of research, the response below was about the best way I could think of to explain it to a customer:
XXXXXXXXXX I demo'ed a pair of Oticon Agil Pro's for 3 weeks. At the end of the demo, the Audiologist advised I try the 'Acto Pro' first since I can return them for the Agil Pro's if I'm not happy. (and save $1,600!). The audi adjusted the Acto Pro's similar to the Agil Pro's (this is my uninformed perspective of what she did/said). I don't like the Acto Pro's as well as I did the Agil Pro's. Here's why: 1. The sound seems less 'natural'.......not sure how to describe this but seems like the Agil Pro is easier/emphsizes conversation/voices, etc better. 2. The 'fidelity' of the sound of the Agil Pro's seem better.....almost like the Acto Pro's have too much 'treble' dialed in (sorry, don't know how to better describe it) The Acto Pro's are 'louder'......for example the Agil Pro's are 'perfect' at the 'home volume' whereas the Acto Pro's have to be turned down 1 notch , and 3. I can hear my own voice much louder than with the Agil Pro's. I've had the Acto Pro's for 2 days. Question(s) 1. Are the differences I'm noting something that can be adjusted by the audi? 2. Is it premature to judge after only 2 days? 3. Any tips on words and/or phrases to better describe what I'm experiencing? Finally, would appreciate any thoughts/advice you might have for a 'newbie's' first use of hearing aids (they do make a dramatic difference for me). I feel like I'm a victim of having tried the 'cadillac' and now I won't be happy with anything less . |
ME:
The Agil Pro's system is like being on an escalator that constantly moves smoothly up or down controlled by your thoughts (the sound level) - though at any one point it always looks like you are in the middle of the escalator and the slope is the same either side of you.
The Acto is more like having several sets of stairs as your inclination to go up or down (sound level) changes, you move from a steeper to a shallower set of stairs. It never seems as natural as the escalator transitions.
2. 2 days is a very short time to judge whether you prefer the stairs or the escalator.
3. You're experiencing the processing benefit of what Oticon have called 'Floating point linearity', which I'm going to explain in terms of escalators and stairs from now on (c) Um bongo 2012.
__________
Saturday, 28 January 2012
Nano, Imini and Soundlens.
I've just taken a closer look at the smaller side of the business today and read around the detail of the smallest and most deep fitting aids.
Customers who still have such a hang-up about cosmetics are out there, but you get into a host of issues based around the customer experience of the mini CIC style of aids.
Traditionally failure rates for these aids are a problem; initial candidacy, lack of features and general flimsiness seem to be just as great barriers. That's before you even get into issues of manual dexterity and the like.
Of the three latest entrants I've only fitted the Soundlens (to a 33 year old Lawyer) who was adamant about the need for the aid to be hidden. He's an experienced wearer with a flat 40dB SN loss. He's also worn CIC for years - we tried to fit binaurally but his left canal was too small. This basically seems to be true of all the systems - you need a fairly unbroken 9x7mm oval cross section running cleanly down the canal or they just won't fit. In terms of average candidacy that pushes the 'people who can' figure under 50% before you start.
Next you have to consider the ability to handle and clean, the propensity for wax ingress at the mic and battery manipulation: all of which deteriorates from your forties. Or to look at it another way you've just carved another half from the 50% of your market, so we're down to 25%.
Acoustically and clinically, the claims of the output are varied and variable - the driver/receiver at the end of a Soundlens is going to really struggle to deliver the maximum output in a large ear canal. That's before you've even considered the issues with occlusion, potential for infection and awkwardness of insertion.
Then there's the final aspect of price: the aids are going to have to be fitted with a reasonable margin as service work is highly likely over their life. The Soundlens launch pricing was right at the to of the high-end product range, though there are lesser models out now.
Putting all of this together it sums out at possibly one or two percent of the average customers fitted here will be interested and can afford this sector. With the growing popularity of the ever reliable RIC products combined with their fancy features, one wonders why the manufacturers are still heavily pushing the mini-CIC products. Perhaps they have heavily invested in the production line technology to make them, or is it a nod to the American market where the CIC (and ITE in general) has a greater foot-hold.
And, in any case it's counter-productive from an industry marketing point of view: as long as people continue to hide their loss with hidden CIC, the less widely accepted proper hearing aid solutions will be.
Customers who still have such a hang-up about cosmetics are out there, but you get into a host of issues based around the customer experience of the mini CIC style of aids.
Traditionally failure rates for these aids are a problem; initial candidacy, lack of features and general flimsiness seem to be just as great barriers. That's before you even get into issues of manual dexterity and the like.
Of the three latest entrants I've only fitted the Soundlens (to a 33 year old Lawyer) who was adamant about the need for the aid to be hidden. He's an experienced wearer with a flat 40dB SN loss. He's also worn CIC for years - we tried to fit binaurally but his left canal was too small. This basically seems to be true of all the systems - you need a fairly unbroken 9x7mm oval cross section running cleanly down the canal or they just won't fit. In terms of average candidacy that pushes the 'people who can' figure under 50% before you start.
Next you have to consider the ability to handle and clean, the propensity for wax ingress at the mic and battery manipulation: all of which deteriorates from your forties. Or to look at it another way you've just carved another half from the 50% of your market, so we're down to 25%.
Acoustically and clinically, the claims of the output are varied and variable - the driver/receiver at the end of a Soundlens is going to really struggle to deliver the maximum output in a large ear canal. That's before you've even considered the issues with occlusion, potential for infection and awkwardness of insertion.
Then there's the final aspect of price: the aids are going to have to be fitted with a reasonable margin as service work is highly likely over their life. The Soundlens launch pricing was right at the to of the high-end product range, though there are lesser models out now.
Putting all of this together it sums out at possibly one or two percent of the average customers fitted here will be interested and can afford this sector. With the growing popularity of the ever reliable RIC products combined with their fancy features, one wonders why the manufacturers are still heavily pushing the mini-CIC products. Perhaps they have heavily invested in the production line technology to make them, or is it a nod to the American market where the CIC (and ITE in general) has a greater foot-hold.
And, in any case it's counter-productive from an industry marketing point of view: as long as people continue to hide their loss with hidden CIC, the less widely accepted proper hearing aid solutions will be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)