Are Digital Hearing Aids better than Analog?

[mac]

Are digital hearing aid really better? I have a hard time believing whether the digital revolution is just a marketing hype or if it really is better.

Anyone who have used both Digital and Analog hearing aids... please share.

My analogs are over 7 years old and need replacing, but I need to make sure digital will be worth it.

[kat]

I have found in my practice that the Digital hearing aids in general are far superior in quality, especially in noisy environments.

There are many articles about this.

I have seen one posted at this link: http://www.hearingaidinformation.org/page04.html

[Wen808]

I've been wearing analog hearing aids for the past 15 years and have owned 4 pairs. I won't lie, they worked well for me. But one of my lady friends told me to try the new digital hearing aids cause she really loved them. So I went in a few months ago and gave them a try. Now I can hear my shows on TV clearer than before and talking with my friends at lunchtime is much better than before.

[daffy93]

My analog hearing only make this whistle noise and I won't able to use it. Is there anyway my audiologist can check these analog to see how much loud sound it has in the hearing aid test machine? She just want to know how much power my old analog has to compare the digital hearing aid.

thanks

[Admin]

She can do several things:

1. Call the manufacturer w/ the serial number and they can tell what the "matrix" is. The numbers should be like 115/40/15 and the middle number would be the maximum gain/power on the hearing aid.

2. Use a test box w/ 2cc coupler to bench test the hearing aid.

3. Use real ear or speech mapping and take a reading in the ear and compare the analog to the response of the digital, all in the ear.

Hope this helps.

[5watts@adelphia.net]

I have been a analog user for aproximately 27 years. I have tried on several occasions to switch to the digital process. I honestly do not like digital for several reasons. One, I am accostomed to the analog and they are sooo comfortable. I don't mind the extra noise in the background and have my tv captions to rely on. Two, I don't need all the advancements and different levels of sounds. It is irritating to me to have to make the switch. Three, the digital is really expensive to acquire even if you have insurance.
I am currently trying to find another company that still makes the mini- analog hearing aids. Rexton is no longer making them and have started to work with Siemens. My audiologist is having me try the programmable and the sound is not even comparable to this. The hard thing is that companies that make the aids aren't making it for them and aren't realizing that there are many of us who just like simple items and nothing complicated.

[daffy93]

My audiologist said that there are not very much analog hearing aids anymore. So, we have to get the digital hearing aids since there are not many analog hearing aids. I think in few years it will disappear and that what my audiologist told me.

[Admin]

Yes, most manufacturers are starting to offer only digital hearing aids.

Yet, bear in mind that for those who love analog, you can order hearing aids with a more traditional sound, such as the Phonak Extra at a reasonable price and also with a compression scheme that sounds just like an analog does.

[DanInStereo]

I've been wearing hearing aids for 44 years, I've seen a lot in the way of advances of technology. I am also a musician (supreme being has a strange sense of humor). I've been struggling for over a month now to get my new digital hearing aids (Phonak Savia) to work in an acceptable fashion.

I think the digital is trying too hard to be clever when it doesn't really need to be. I've had Phonak's Sono-forte, programmable, with remote. These were the best hearing aids I've had, flat out bar none. Unfortunately, they are over 10 years old. I was hoping for digital to be a new level up, just like the analog Sono-forte were.

My biggest complaint is the oversensitivity of the noise suppression programs. My audi is telling me that federal regulations say 'xyz' decibels are not allowed. My own voice, when raised, trips the device. Accents on the guitar trips it. A hand clap sets it off. This is ridiculous. Transients are not the same as contiinuous loudness ie: industrial machinery. Furthermore, I'm a musician, I can't be having my hearing aids going 'click' all throughout passages. I've brought my guitar (and amp) to my audi's office. She felt some of the accents were pretty loud. Well, duh, they're supposed to be. Have you ever heard a classical orchestra? They're pretty loud. At the current settings of my hearing aids, they'd be just about shut down during the forte passages.

I just saw my audi on monday. All this week, I've been in audio purgatory. Know that little beeping thing your car does when you put your key in the ignition? Well, I'm getting a secondary 'echo' tone, that sounds like the feedback suppression test tone. Listening to Mozart, the flute and piccolo parts, especially when used as long notes behind a melody line, swell and smear with digital snarl. On my guitar, every note above the open B string sounds buzzy as all heck (and it is not the guitar, checked it with my old analogs, it is fine). The weird thing is, this didn't happen in the office monday morning. My batteries ended up going dead monday night. I'm wondering if the programming we did earlier that day was affected by weak batteries?

[DanInStereo]

I've been wearing hearing aids for 44 years, I've seen a lot in the way of advances of technology. I am also a musician (supreme being has a strange sense of humor). I've been struggling for over a month now to get my new digital hearing aids (Phonak Savia) to work in an acceptable fashion.

I think the digital is trying too hard to be clever when it doesn't really need to be. I've had Phonak's Sono-forte, programmable, with remote. These were the best hearing aids I've had, flat out bar none. Unfortunately, they are over 10 years old. I was hoping for digital to be a new level up, just like the analog Sono-forte were.

My biggest complaint is the oversensitivity of the noise suppression programs. My audi is telling me that federal regulations say 'xyz' decibels are not allowed. My own voice, when raised, trips the device. Accents on the guitar trips it. A hand clap sets it off. This is ridiculous. Transients are not the same as contiinuous loudness ie: industrial machinery. Furthermore, I'm a musician, I can't be having my hearing aids going 'click' all throughout passages. I've brought my guitar (and amp) to my audi's office. She felt some of the accents were pretty loud. Well, duh, they're supposed to be. Have you ever heard a classical orchestra? They're pretty loud. At the current settings of my hearing aids, they'd be just about shut down during the forte passages.

I just saw my audi on monday. All this week, I've been in audio purgatory. Know that little beeping thing your car does when you put your key in the ignition? Well, I'm getting a secondary 'echo' tone, that sounds like the feedback suppression test tone. Listening to Mozart, the flute and piccolo parts, especially when used as long notes behind a melody line, swell and smear with digital snarl. On my guitar, every note above the open B string sounds buzzy as all heck (and it is not the guitar, checked it with my old analogs, it is fine). The weird thing is, this didn't happen in the office monday morning. My batteries ended up going dead monday night. I'm wondering if the programming we did earlier that day was affected by weak batteries?

[Jeanne]

Are digital hearing aid really better? I have a hard time believing whether the digital revolution is just a marketing hype or if it really is better.

Anyone who have used both Digital and Analog hearing aids... please share.

My analogs are over 7 years old and need replacing, but I need to make sure digital will be worth it.

Mac, I have used analog aids for over 20 years & recently tried digital Starkey Destiny 1200s which did not work out well for me at all. I'm going to try Oticon Sumo DXs tomorrow to see how they are. My advice would be to make sure you have a long enough trial period (60 days) before you buy. I am not convinced the digitals are for everybody as I did not like the lack of constancy with the Destinys nor the numerous adjustments they require. Sounds would waver too much and often caused either a lack of clarity or the blaring high pitches that almost hurt. I like Oticon very much & would choose it over most other brands but it's wise to remain open to other's suggestions too. Oticons have lasted the longest for me. Jeanne

[RMinNJ]

I've had analog aids for most of my life and have been wearing Oticon DigiFocus aids for the last 6 years. In terms of durablility and functionality,
these have lasted me the longest of all aids I've worn.

As to those switching to digital; yes, try several different aids. My previous
anaolog were Oticons 440s. I'm interested in new digitals now and have
been lead to believe that my brain may we used to the sound of Oticon aids..
switching manufacturers may prove difficult.

[ZCT]

The digital / analogue discussion is an interesting topic and is one I have had with many of my patients. It is also interesting reading the opinion of some of the users on this forum.

First off it is important to understand that there is digital and there is digital. It's like saying, "My friend got this gasoline powered car the other day and he hates it." Does this mean we should never buy a gasoline powered car? Of course not. There are thousands of different kinds of gasoline powered car and there are hundreds of different kind of digital aid. The fact they are digital does not make them good or bad, and it doesn't even have to make them all that different to analogue.

It is still possible to get what are known as 'class D' hearing aids which are generally non-programmable analogue hearing aids. They are using some digital element to the design which technically makes them digital, but apart from some enhanced clarity most users would hardly notice the difference between these and some regular analogue aids. Class D technology is still available from most companies. If you are looking for a simple analogue like aid, this will probably do it for you.

Once you get into the realm of digital programmable you are in a different world. There are many options and clever features, and the problem is many hearing professionals are excited by the hype and eager to recommend this brand new technology to people. Unfortunately there are plenty of professionals out there who qualified prior to the mid 90s when this technology became commonplace. Often these hearing professionals were taken by surprise when their job suddenly required programming a hearing aid, using a computer. From what I've seen there are a significant number of hearing professionals who are not good at programming a hearing aid system, and this is more often than not the problem with modern digital aids.

Modern digital programmable aids are fantastic because there are usually thousands of different settings that can be manipulated to create the best sound for the patient, and if the patient's hearing changes the aids can often be re-programmed to the new prescription. Unfortunately some times they are not programmed correctly by the specialist. They fit them with too many options like multi memory, program them badly, fail to take into account that the patient was a previous analogue user.

Because programming a digital hearing aid is so complicated many hearing professionals don't do it right. Many of them shy away from it so much they simply accept the factory default settings. I believe that this is the cause of most dissatisfaction with digital aids.

Any decent digital aid has the capacity to be as simple to use as a good old analogue hearing aid, and with the right programming should sound very similar to the analogue aid, but with the advantage of being re-programmable if the loss changes, and with enhanced clarity and dynamic range. But if the hearing professional is not a programming expert, there is a good chance the aid will end up sounding so different than what the user expects, they will dislike the sound compared to an analogue aid they may have worn for 5-10 years or more.

So in conclusion digital does not mean bad. There are many varieties of digital aid and with the right aid selection, the right variety of digital, and the right programming a patient should be easily transitioned from analogue to digital and will certainly benefit from the move. While I hate to admit it, for the most part if the transition doesn't work, the fault is usually with the hearing professional.

[ZCT]

Mac, I have used analog aids for over 20 years & recently tried digital Starkey Destiny 1200s which did not work out well for me at all. I'm going to try Oticon Sumo DXs tomorrow to see how they are. My advice would be to make sure you have a long enough trial period (60 days) before you buy. I am not convinced the digitals are for everybody as I did not like the lack of constancy with the Destinys nor the numerous adjustments they require. Sounds would waver too much and often caused either a lack of clarity or the blaring high pitches that almost hurt. I like Oticon very much & would choose it over most other brands but it's wise to remain open to other's suggestions too. Oticons have lasted the longest for me. Jeanne

Jeanne, quite honestly if your Destiny's had the problems you described and needed lots of adjustments, I would bet good money that the specialist simply isn't good at programming them. I hope (s)he does a better job with the Oticons. Either (s)he will be more experienced with them, or they will have fewer options that will make them easier to program.

A Destiny is one of the most complicated aids to program on the market, but if set up correctly should offer a very good replacement for an analogue aid. I've fitted 72+ patients with them since they came out, and had one failure. That's not a bad success ratio.

[jlingo]

Jeanne, quite honestly if your Destiny's had the problems you described and needed lots of adjustments, I would bet good money that the specialist simply isn't good at programming them. I hope (s)he does a better job with the Oticons. Either (s)he will be more experienced with them, or they will have fewer options that will make them easier to program.

A Destiny is one of the most complicated aids to program on the market, but if set up correctly should offer a very good replacement for an analogue aid. I've fitted 72+ patients with them since they came out, and had one failure. That's not a bad success ratio.

HI ZCT,

Let say, once you bought hearing aids and then the audi is not qualified enough to program it properly. Who should we contact to set it up properly? Do we contact the manufacturer for programming assistance?

I noticed that many audi's are reluctant to help you program your hearing aids if you don't buy the hearing aids from them(Conflict of Interest)?

[SteveAUD]

I get this question alot, so I'll say what I tell all my patients who have worn analog aids for any considerable length of time. "There's no reason not to try it, but just so you know there is about an 80% chance you will adjust to them fine, there is also a 20% chance you won't and will end up sticking with analog". Why? Because the analog signal is a just boomy boomy signal in it's own right, which their brain is used to. When I fit someone with a digital aid who has worn analog for 10yrs, there is a chance they may come back and say it's not loud enough, no matter how much I turn it up. This is because their brain is expecting the loudness property (that they got with analog), that digital hearing aids can't deliver. The other issue analog users face is with alot of the noise reduction/directional microphone technology found in today's digital hearing aids. Often I will get a patient who has never worn a hearing aid with directional mics come back and tell me, "Everything gets too quiet when I get into a noisy situation?". This is due to the fact that they were used to getting sound 360* around them with their old analog aids (one microphone). The new aids with D-Mics are attempting to lower the sound from the sides and the back, which they sometimes don't like. :D

In a nutshell are digital hearing aids much better? Yes, they produce a much cleaner speech signal, yes they perform better in background noise than analog hearing aids. However, they're not for everyone! If you're dealing with an audiologist who is gung-ho digital for everyone, without looking at the persons previous experience, you should probably run, not walk away.

[ZCT]

HI ZCT,

Let say, once you bought hearing aids and then the audi is not qualified enough to program it properly. Who should we contact to set it up properly? Do we contact the manufacturer for programming assistance?

I noticed that many audi's are reluctant to help you program your hearing aids if you don't buy the hearing aids from them(Conflict of Interest)?

Personally I will program any aid produced by the company I work for (my software cannot access most other brands). I don't see it as a conflict of interest, I see it as my professional duty.

It is hard to say how you approach this once you have made your purchase. This is why I believe it is always best to insist on trying test aids before you buy. This means that you get to watch your audi/HIS actually program a set of digital aids before you buy. If he struggles to get you hearing well with the test aids, seems confused, or simply refuses to show you test aids, consider trying elsewhere.

Once you are stuck with an aid, you just have to see if there is another dealership in that area that carries that brand, or can find someone willing to help you. Many will do so, on the hope that you will come to them for service, battery sales and eventually a new aid in a few years.

As a professional I am extremely frustrated by other 'professionals' who cannot program hearing aids properly. I frequently see people who were fitted and the dispenser did not even adjust the aid from the factory settings. All modern digital aids should be calibrated in a patients ear, not simply fitted as they come from the factory.

[ZCT]

In a nutshell are digital hearing aids much better? Yes, they produce a much cleaner speech signal, yes they perform better in background noise than analog hearing aids. However, they're not for everyone! If you're dealing with an audiologist who is gung-ho digital for everyone, without looking at the persons previous experience, you should probably run, not walk away.

I have to disagree Steve. With the right programming EVERYONE can benefit from digital. The kind of aids I fit have special programming algorithms for previous analog users, and it is certainly possible to simulate an analog sound if that's really what the patient wants/needs. The mistake many dispensers make is they fit the digital aids with factory default options and lack the programming skill to take into account a patients previous experience level.

Let us also not forget Class D technology which is kind of digital, without being programmable or 'smart' like modern technology. This is a very low cost alternative to analog (class A and B) with a cleaner crisper sound and better dynamic range.

[analoglover]

I have been a analog user for aproximately 27 years. I have tried on several occasions to switch to the digital process. I honestly do not like digital for several reasons. One, I am accostomed to the analog and they are sooo comfortable. I don't mind the extra noise in the background and have my tv captions to rely on. Two, I don't need all the advancements and different levels of sounds. It is irritating to me to have to make the switch. Three, the digital is really expensive to acquire even if you have insurance.
I am currently trying to find another company that still makes the mini- analog hearing aids. Rexton is no longer making them and have started to work with Siemens. My audiologist is having me try the programmable and the sound is not even comparable to this. The hard thing is that companies that make the aids aren't making it for them and aren't realizing that there are many of us who just like simple items and nothing complicated.

Hi
I have tried more than 10 digital hearing aid last year and found none of them is comparable to my Belton CSP-II programmable analog hearing aid. I feel frustrated and frankly, depressed. I tried even Beltone own highest top digital model, the ONE, cost almost $ 3,000 CDN for one only(not pair). Still it was not clear in hearing speech. Anyone can help me?

[timothy36]

Yes, most manufacturers are starting to offer only digital hearing aids.

Yet, bear in mind that for those who love analog, you can order hearing aids with a more traditional sound, such as the Phonak Extra at a reasonable price and also with a compression scheme that sounds just like an analog does.

Not trying to be negative, but I have one (Phonak Extra) and still have a hard time adjusting. I love my analog and it is unfortunately going away. Very discouraged since I have been wearing a hearing aid since the age of four. I am now 36 and trying desperately to acclimate to digital hearing aids. Manufacturers and audiologists explain to users that digital is better technology. That may be very true, However, better technology does not necessarily translate into better hearing for some. I realize I may be one of the few that can't acclimate to digital technology. Bottom line is, either you can hear with them or you can't. I miss much more conversation with the digitals than I do with the analogs. I am comfortable with analog hearing aids. What about the customer/user? Since when did manufacturers/dispensers/audiologists decide what's best for the user when it's really about how the user functions best in an everyday setting? I almost feel that my career is being threatened b/c I can't hear with digitals very well. I am in the healthcare field and do very well with analogs. Right now, I am struggling with the digitals while at work, not to mention at home too. Any suggestions?

[analoglover]

Hi:
I think we are the only few that cannot be changed to digital world. I am trying Oticon Ergo (only programmable analog hearing aid left in Canada) and are still in the adjusting stage. I am still not happy with the settings. Tomorrow I will go to see the dispenser again to fine tune the hearing aid. Hopefully I have some luck.

[JgearyAud]

absolutely. 200% better. It may take a while to transition if you are used to analog, but they are far superior.

[analoglover]

Hi:
Which model you are using? What kind of hearing loss you have.

Thanks

[DanInStereo]

I've had digital hearing aids for over a year now. I was having such unsatisfactory performance with the Phonak Savia, that my audi tried a different model, the Eleva.

For the most part, the different algorithm has worked very well for me. The one area they fail miserably as did the Savia is in live music. My guitars are still too 'papery' sounding, not 'silky' like they are with analog. The digital are still to sensitive to accents and transients.

I've gotten so frustrated that I asked my audi to find me a pair of analog hearing aids, just so I can have them for playing guitar. She called me today, and said she still hasn't found anything. WTF?!? Is it time to find a different dispenser?

Are there any quality analogs left out there? I'm even willing to sell my best guitar so I can get a fresh set of analogs. I put my old analogs in this week, and my guitars sounded wonderful, rich and full like they should. No clickings on the loud passages. Please tell me I can get some, otherwise I WILL be reduced to trying to scavenge used ones from nursing homes and funeral parlors.

[xbulder]

I while ago I heard of a gentleman in Canada which only fits hearing instruments to musicians. I believe he is a professor @ the University of western Ontario (not really sure). But given how peculiar your needs are
It maybe good idea to check him out.. As a simple suggestion, try to pick a hearing aid with a very extendend frequency response range..
________
SexyLichi (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/SexyLichi/)

[analoglover]

Hello Xbulder:
What do you mean by hearing aid with a very extendend frequency response range?
I have another question. What is the difference between input compression and output compression for an analog hearing aid? What effect do they on sound quality?
I have just ordered Starkey input compression analog hearing aid, but I am not sure the name something like IDS? My dispenser told me I will have it in 10 days.
What a cruel world! Why the hearing aid manufacturer stop producing analog hearing aid if they know someone in the world like me and Daninstereo still need analog hearing aids? The manufacturer should think hearing aid like a prescription drug and is necessary and vital to the people. They cannot force the patients to use digital drug if the patients are allergic to digital drug. Am I right?
Please respond.
Also, you mentioned a professor in U. of Western Ontario still dispense analog hearing aid. Can you give me more detail? I live in Toronto, Canada and is about two hours drive from London, Ontario.
Appreciated.

Paul

[xbulder]

Hello Xbulder:
What do you mean by hearing aid with a very extendend frequency response range?
I have another question. What is the difference between input compression and output compression for an analog hearing aid? What effect do they on sound quality?
I have just ordered Starkey input compression analog hearing aid, but I am not sure the name something like IDS? My dispenser told me I will have it in 10 days.
What a cruel world! Why the hearing aid manufacturer stop producing analog hearing aid if they know someone in the world like me and Daninstereo still need analog hearing aids? The manufacturer should think hearing aid like a prescription drug and is necessary and vital to the people. They cannot force the patients to use digital drug if the patients are allergic to digital drug. Am I right?
Please respond.
Also, you mentioned a professor in U. of Western Ontario still dispense analog hearing aid. Can you give me more detail? I live in Toronto, Canada and is about two hours drive from London, Ontario.
Appreciated.

Paul

Dear Paul:
Some instruments have a frequency response of 5 or 6 hz while most mid to high end goes up to 7-8hz. I believe oticon has an instrument that gets closer to 10hz. Supposely it allows you with a more rich sound and better localization clues. In addition, the music experience tends to better...

the agc I or Agc O question, I havent heard that one a while ago.
i believe AGC I compression happends before the sounds get to the amplifier
and the AGC O after. Honestly, I had ask many people when to use one or the Other and I have not even heard a consensus. I heard that AGC I is better but perhaps i would poll my peers on this one.. Perhaps admin could shed light...

I would try to see if I could find who he is, as I do not know. I meet someone who is his client.. Other than that I can not help..
________
Volcano vaporizer (http://twitter.com/vaporizer)

[analoglover]

Hi Xbulder, Admin:
Finally, I got a right hearing aid for my ears. The answer is Starkey Genesis input compression analog hearing aid. Somebody said is a digital hearing aid but adjusted to analog settings. It doesn't matter. I will ask anybody who does not like digital hearing aid to try Starkey Genesis.
I have tried like 20 different models, digital or analog or hybrid in last two years. Finally I got the right one. I remembered someone said I would never find a right one because I am wierd. Yes, I am wired to use 2 years to research and try 20 different models and finally I got the right one. I think my hair will be less grey from now on and I will thanks to anybody have given advice to me and of course thanks to myself, because I am the one that work hard and believe myself.

Paul

I am sorry to tell you that after I tried a few more days, I found the Starkey Genesis was not working well for my ear. Suddenly I feel I cannot hear a lot of speech from a lot of people. Again, I then tried Beltone CSP-II again, it is much better. I hate to say that I went back to the old Beltone. I am so frustrated right now and I don't know what to do. Should I try the Starkey power Genesis aid or try something else : Unitron Sound F/X and Argosy OnQue, and others with the Dynamic EQ II circuit (I got this from Goggle group) or I just give up and quit my job?

Paul

[xbulder]

im glad you found an aid that works for you..
ultimately it is all about U
________
SIDE EFFECTS FROM WELLBUTRIN (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/wellbutrin/)

[DanInStereo]

I would try to see if I could find who he is, as I do not know. I meet someone who is his client.. Other than that I can not help..

I'll be interested in checking that out, so if you could find out the gentleman's name, it would be greatly appreciated.

My audi called me yesterday, she still hasn't found any analog units yet. There is a software upgrade/update she wants to try. I'll be doing that in 2 weeks. At this point, I don't think a different set of 1s and 0s is going to overcome what appears to be a physical/mechanical design shortcoming in the digital systems in general. We will see.

[xbulder]

I have wrote this client to ask for this guy #
maybe it could be of help
________
TOYS EROTIC (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/1093/erotic/videos/1)

[analoglover]

Hi Xbulder:
I am sorry to tell you that I am not satisfied with the Starkey Genesis after I tried few more days. I could not hear a lot of speeches. I hate to say that I compared with my old Beltone CSP-II and I found out that I could hear more speech by Beltone. Like I edited my previous message, should I try Unitron F/X or any other model you can suggest?

Thanks
Paul

[xbulder]

we are really running out of options,
I know beltone do sell analoge instruments out of the US.
Is it possible to ask someone who lives out of the states
to get you an identical aid like the one U love?
Any friends in say mexico for instance?.
there are a lot of models that are not sold in the states but are sold
in 3rd world countries for tenders, particularily entry level analoges
and digitals. This could be the best bet. I seriously dout you would find
something identical to the beltone in other brand...
Did you trye the Phonaks? the old ones?
Phonak has quite a selection in analog power aids,
i dont really know if they are still sold in the us though
________
Dc marijuana dispensaries (http://dc.dispensaries.org/)

[DanInStereo]

Did you trye the Phonaks? the old ones?
Phonak has quite a selection in analog power aids,
i dont really know if they are still sold in the us though

That is exactly what I would like to find, Phonaks like my old ones. Best hearing aids I've ever had. I've been wearing them again, for the past 2 weeks. If anybody knows how I can get an outside of the US tender, please let me know. My audi can not get the old models here.

[xbulder]

A wild bet, why dont you go on the phonak website
check who deals phonak in Mexico and call them and ask if
they can sell U an analogue aid or something, maybe they can
courrier those aids to you and u could have ur audi program it for you..

I dont anticipate this would be cheap..
________
Motorcycle tires (http://www.motorcycle-tech.com/tires/motorcycle-tires)

[DanInStereo]

A wild bet, why dont you go on the phonak website
check who deals phonak in Mexico and call them and ask if
they can sell U an analogue aid or something, maybe they can
courrier those aids to you and u could have ur audi program it for you..

I dont anticipate this would be cheap..

figures, that part of their site is not working

[xbulder]

try mexico yellow pages
put "audifonos"
________
Wet_kitty (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/Wet_kitty/)

[DanInStereo]

I've found 11 places in Mexico that either sell or service Phonak hearing aids. Now I've got to figure out how to communicate with them.

[xbulder]

find out who imports Phonak in mexico, in south america
generally the one who imports also retails and wholesales @ the same time

so get in touch with who ever, buys directly from phonak Headquarters

agree on a price and send the money via westrn union..

im sure he will be more than happy to sell those aids
________
Arizona Dispensary (http://arizona.dispensaries.org/)

[Lornawest]

Hi Guys,

I am from London and I was wondering if there was any one out there that could provide me some advice.

I unfortunately I lost my Widex analog about two months ago and without success I have still not found the right ones for me. I am extremly depressed and I have lost all my confidence without my aid.

I have tried the GN resound and the speech is just muffled. I have a severe hearing loss which I have had since a child. My analog were the best ones you could probably get and I had no problems what so ever. Now I have come across so many problems that I am begining to lose hope.

I am enquring about the Phonak Savia Art and I was wondering if anyone had come across any experience with them. Why is it that companies have to stop making analog completely!!;)

[Ssherb]

Lorna,

Most digitals can be made to simulate analog by raising the kneepoints to the upper 60's or low 70's. It eases the transition to digital aids for most long-term analog wearers. Unitron (owned b the same company as Phonak) is available in England through the Amplifon Hearing Aid Centers chain (I used to work for them).

Unitron had set up the Unison 6 model to allow much higher kneepoints for this reason. Personally I like the Unitron Moxi product for most patients...but both the Phonak product line and the Siemens digital lines allow for specific kneepoint settings.

These settings tell the aid when to go into "compression mode" and dampen sound. this is why digital aids sound softer than analogs...you're not getting overamplified in some frequencies like you do with analogs. Adjustable kneepoints can ease the transition.

Hope this helps.

[xbulder]

you also need to set the compresion ratios to be linear

[JohnAustralia]

Dan,
Like you I am attempting to be a muso. I have found new aids to be a totally unacceptable replacement for my Phonak SonoFortes. I have contacted a Canadian specialising in aids for musos. He may be the one you're looking for. He couldn't really help me but this is what he said.
"Hi John:
The reason your new hearing aids don't work as well as the old ones is that the newer digital ones need to have a limiter or ceiling that is placed just after the microphone. This "ceiling" ensures that overly loud sounds don't get in to the analog to digital converter (A/D converter). Most A/D converters cannot handle overly loud sounds. Its not that the sound of the music would be too loud for you; its more of an issue with many modern hearing aids where the A/D converter has limitations, especially for louder inputs such as music. I suspect that the newer aid can't handle the louder inputs. "Aid #3" in one of my articles was the Siemens Acuris, if memory serves me correctly. I have attached a manuscript of an article that was published in June 2007 in the Canadian Hearing Report (which is the official magazine of the Canadian Academy of Audiology). It explains this in some more detail.
Hope this helps.
Marshall"
His name is Marshal Chasin. email:marshall.chasin@rogers.com
His article can be found on the net. http://www.musiciansclinics.com/home.asp
Please let's know if it's helpful.
Regards,
John

[DanInStereo]

John,

Thus lies the crux of the matter. I do not want an A/D converter after the microphone if it can't handle normal volume spikes as are found in live music. No amount of kneepoint adjustments are going to help if the limiter is cutting off the peaks before the A/D. Those peaks are critical to hearing live music properly, and that is where digital are insufficient, inadequate and unsuitable.

This is not looking very hopeful. God help me if anything ever happens to my analog hearing aids.

[rosie11]

I've had digital for the past 7 years and now in desperate need of new hearing aids. I've noticed that I've lost all will to go on since then. I work in retail, not in a job that I went to college for. And I can't afford new aids. Hopefully I can get them free through the state of Florida. Of course, I didn't realize I was going downhill. My physical and mental well-being don't exist.
I truly thought these digitals would be worth it. I have had been tested last year to replace these, and still cannot understand through any set of digitals. The one thing I noticed about my analog, my brain has already adjusted to the background noise, voices, I don't need a computer to do that for me. I miss out on many conversations. I don't hear the high frequency noises that supposedly come through, like car beeps, my dog's collar clinking, etc.
I want an audiologist who cares about me, not about how much money they can get off of me. That is why they push the digital.

[xbulder]

dear Rosie;

perhaps, the reason why they push digital is that overall, it is a better solution.

Most digital aids, have more parameters so that the instrument could be calibrated for your needs...

Using digitals can be compared to a Cd while using analogues can be compare to a LP...

You should be able to get a good digital with a balance for price
My choices of the top of my head...


Oticon Go pro
Phonak Una
GN pixel or Plus 5

[jgirardi]

Two things to keep in mind. For those who have been wearing analog for most of their life, you must realize it can take up to 30 or more days for the brain to adjust to the new sounds of a digital HA. The transition from an analog to a digital can be very tough to deal with and time consuming, but in the end, a digital is far better than an analog. It's like comparing a LP record to a Digital CD, in terms of sound quality, CD is far better. I can't say I notice that much of a difference between a LP and a CD, but according to normal hearing folks, it is a big difference. As far as manufactures go, think of it this way, no one makes cars with a carburetor, they ALL have fuel injections, it the same thing with HA, eventually there will be no more analog HA, just digital.

[xbulder]

yes, to my knowledge less than 2% instruments are analogue

eventually they will be all digital, and it could be program to simulate analogue sound (linear)

[DanInStereo]

Two things to keep in mind. For those who have been wearing analog for most of their life, you must realize it can take up to 30 or more days for the brain to adjust to the new sounds of a digital HA. The transition from an analog to a digital can be very tough to deal with and time consuming, but in the end, a digital is far better than an analog. It's like comparing a LP record to a Digital CD, in terms of sound quality, CD is far better. I can't say I notice that much of a difference between a LP and a CD, but according to normal hearing folks, it is a big difference. As far as manufactures go, think of it this way, no one makes cars with a carburetor, they ALL have fuel injections, it the same thing with HA, eventually there will be no more analog HA, just digital.

I've been trying to get used to my digital hearing aids since november of 2006, and they still suck for live music. I have absolutely no incentive to pick up my guitars when I'm wearing my digital HA, because I get that *&^%(#* clipping sound. My audi has NOT been able to get it to stop doing that, because it is inherent in the fricking design.

[xbulder]

did you ask your audi to put a music program..

have you try such thing?

[audiogal]

Dan,

Are you performing live music (vs. just listening)? If so, you may want to consider in-ear monitors instead of wearing your hearing aids. The sound engineer should be able to give you the right mix to compensate for your hearing loss, and then you are protecting your ears from further hearing loss.

Some of the newer digital aids have a dedicated music program that generally turns off the noise reduction and feedback control, among other things that can tend to distort music. What sounds good with music may not sound good in other situations and vice versa, so a separate program is usually best vs. trying to change the overall hearing aid settings.

[DanInStereo]

did you ask your audi to put a music program..

have you try such thing?

yes, the music programs are a joke.

[DanInStereo]

Dan,

Are you performing live music (vs. just listening)? If so, you may want to consider in-ear monitors instead of wearing your hearing aids. The sound engineer should be able to give you the right mix to compensate for your hearing loss, and then you are protecting your ears from further hearing loss.

Some of the newer digital aids have a dedicated music program that generally turns off the noise reduction and feedback control, among other things that can tend to distort music. What sounds good with music may not sound good in other situations and vice versa, so a separate program is usually best vs. trying to change the overall hearing aid settings.

Were I to be playing professionally, I would definitely use in-ear-monitoring. Thing is, my old analog hearing aids ARE in ear monitoring. It makes no sense that I can not get what I used to have, functioning hearing aids that are capable of processing live music, on the spot. We have been trying since Nov 2006 to get these fershlungering things to work in an acceptable fashion. The digital aids supposedly have 'music' programs. Well over a dozen trips to the audi, different programs, and the 'clicking' is STILL there. It is unacceptable, completely unacceptable, that an unplugged acoustic guitar is too loud for the digital hearing aids' music program. Loud accents are a part of music. There should be NO NOTICEABLE ARTIFACTS of any kind being imparted upon the sound by the hearing aids, or what good are they?

[audiogal]

Hmmm....mind if I ask which model aids you have?

[DanInStereo]

Hmmm....mind if I ask which model aids you have?

The analogs are Phonak Pics, programmable analog units. I believe my audi referred to them as 332s. The digitals are Phonak Eleva. We had tried the Savia, and those were utterly unbearable. The Eleva were better than the Savia for non-musical applications, by a slight margin.

We are going to have the Phonak rep come to the office, to bring a different set of eyes to look at the situation. I'm pretty much at my wit's end. Had I known this was what the future held, I would have bought 3 or 4 sets of the Pics, so I could have a lifetime supply of good quality live music audio.:mad:

[JennyB]

The analogs are Phonak Pics, programmable analog units. I believe my audi referred to them as 332s. The digitals are Phonak Eleva. We had tried the Savia, and those were utterly unbearable. The Eleva were better than the Savia for non-musical applications, by a slight margin.

We are going to have the Phonak rep come to the office, to bring a different set of eyes to look at the situation. I'm pretty much at my wit's end. Had I known this was what the future held, I would have bought 3 or 4 sets of the Pics, so I could have a lifetime supply of good quality live music audio.:mad:


Hi DanInStereo,

I am also am a musician, and I also used to use Phonak Savia Arts. My hearing recently dropped so I am no longer able to use Savias but like you, I found music to be horrible with them. I sand soprano in a choir and whenever I would be singing some of the higher notes (anything above the staff really) my hearing aids would assume it was feedback and block it out. That got very frustrating.

Guitar also sounded like crap for me! So did mandolin and uke! My audi did EVERYTHING she could think of to fix the problem. She consulted with the Phonak reps, and one of her collegues who used to be a sound engineer, and is a musician herself, i spoke with her as well. We never did figure anything out with the Savias.

I am now trying Naidas, but for playing music I don't hear anything without aids, but I can feel the music and can even sing AND pitch match based on the vibrations. No sound input at all. It was hard as heck to teach myself to do it but I can be pitch perfect for anysong now as long as I have the time to learn it. I can also identify and 'listen' to songs by feeling them. The vibrations have become my music, instead of the sounds. It took a lot of time, and a lot of effort. I have some videos of me singing and playing guitar (without being able to hear) on youtube if you are interested.

Good luck with the Elevas, I just though you should know that you aren't alone in your pain with the Savias hehehe

[xbulder]

Hi DanInStereo,

I am also am a musician, and I also used to use Phonak Savia Arts. My hearing recently dropped so I am no longer able to use Savias but like you, I found music to be horrible with them. I sand soprano in a choir and whenever I would be singing some of the higher notes (anything above the staff really) my hearing aids would assume it was feedback and block it out. That got very frustrating.

Guitar also sounded like crap for me! So did mandolin and uke! My audi did EVERYTHING she could think of to fix the problem. She consulted with the Phonak reps, and one of her collegues who used to be a sound engineer, and is a musician herself, i spoke with her as well. We never did figure anything out with the Savias.

I am now trying Naidas, but for playing music I don't hear anything without aids, but I can feel the music and can even sing AND pitch match based on the vibrations. No sound input at all. It was hard as heck to teach myself to do it but I can be pitch perfect for anysong now as long as I have the time to learn it. I can also identify and 'listen' to songs by feeling them. The vibrations have become my music, instead of the sounds. It took a lot of time, and a lot of effort. I have some videos of me singing and playing guitar (without being able to hear) on youtube if you are interested.

Good luck with the Elevas, I just though you should know that you aren't alone in your pain with the Savias hehehe

the problem with previous phonak instrument is that it confines you into 4 programs- as you well know you live in a more complex world that 4 defined enviroments.. the new execelias should do the trick

[xbulder]

An instrument with a bandwith more than 8,000hz should do the trick

[audiogal]

Okay, direct from Marshall Chasin's lecture on music & hearing aids at the AAA convention:

Speech has an intensity of 65dB SPL +12
Shouted speech can be 82dB SPL
Music can reach 105 dBA

The peak input limiting level (PILL) of most digital hearing aids limit sound above 85dB SPL, which is designed that way so that the analog to digital converter is not overdriven. It is great for speech, but bad for music. For music, ideally the PILL should be at least 105 dB SPL.

Dr. Chasin recommended lowering the volume on the stereo or other input and increasing the gain on the aid to get around the low PILL. Obviously, this does not work well for live music though.

Another option in to use an FM system as the input, but again this option depends on whether the aid has FM capability.

His cheap method was to use scotch tape over the hearing aid microphones, which will provide a flat 7dB attenuation up to 4ooo Hz, thus reducing the sound level going into the analog to digital converter. He says that if you add white-out to the scotch tape, there will be up to a 12dB reduction. Then you increase the gain to compensate, but since this is after the A/D converter, you are not going up against the low PILL problem.

Another fix was that if you have a BTE aid with a single directional mic, you can twist the aid so that the rear port faces forward. This won't work if the aid has two omni-directional microphones, though.

KAMP is probably the best circuit for music: it has a high input limiting level, one channel (best for music), and WDRC (best compression scheme for music...it has longer release times).

[DanInStereo]

Okay, direct from Marshall Chasin's lecture on music & hearing aids at the AAA convention:

Speech has an intensity of 65dB SPL +12
Shouted speech can be 82dB SPL
Music can reach 105 dBA

The peak input limiting level (PILL) of most digital hearing aids limit sound above 85dB SPL, which is designed that way so that the analog to digital converter is not overdriven. It is great for speech, but bad for music. For music, ideally the PILL should be at least 105 dB SPL.

Dr. Chasin recommended lowering the volume on the stereo or other input and increasing the gain on the aid to get around the low PILL. Obviously, this does not work well for live music though.

Another option in to use an FM system as the input, but again this option depends on whether the aid has FM capability.

His cheap method was to use scotch tape over the hearing aid microphones, which will provide a flat 7dB attenuation up to 4ooo Hz, thus reducing the sound level going into the analog to digital converter. He says that if you add white-out to the scotch tape, there will be up to a 12dB reduction. Then you increase the gain to compensate, but since this is after the A/D converter, you are not going up against the low PILL problem.

Another fix was that if you have a BTE aid with a single directional mic, you can twist the aid so that the rear port faces forward. This won't work if the aid has two omni-directional microphones, though.

KAMP is probably the best circuit for music: it has a high input limiting level, one channel (best for music), and WDRC (best compression scheme for music...it has longer release times).

85 db is grossly inadequate for live music, I'm louder than that when I yell.

What is KAMP?

[audiogal]

KAMP is a hearing aid circuit made by Etymotic Research:

http://www.etymotic.com/ha/kamp.aspx

K-AMP hearing aids are available by special request from the following manufacturers:
General Hearing Instruments 800-824-3021 www.generalhearing.com
Prairie Labs, Inc. 800-322-8238

[Venster]

Definately. Digital hearing aids are more advanced and sophisticated than its analogue counterparts. Expect to get what you pay for.

[Gale]

Yes they are better in a technical sense but that does not insure they are better for everyone.

Hearing like vision is not a technical/physiological process but is a psychological process. If they were a physiological processes then eye witnesses standing side by side would file identical reports of what they saw when viewing an accident in progress but often do not.

Both vision and hearing (well all senses) results are a mental process. If a person hears well with an analog aid it does not insure a digital aid will be better. I think this could be more pronounced in a 70 year old vs a 7 year old wearer of hearing aids.

Digital computers are great but some still prefer to write letters by hand. There may be a downside to the digital aids not often discussed.

If local fitters are only promoting $5K to $6K digital sets when an $800 set would have made the person in need of hearing aids happy does it not perhaps limit the number of people with corrected hearing?

We know if top of the line can be purchase factory direct for around $1000 and the shops are selling them for $3000 there should be a gross margin of about $2300 per ear if they can rope one into spending $3000.

Wal-Mart initially lowered prices by reducing distribution costs. Companies like America Hears are starting to do the same thing in the hearing aid market and other distribution models with be introduced. In five years from now America Hears may be selling top of the line aids for $500. Some of us can remember when a run of the mill PC was $4K and now 100 fold improved run of the mill PC can be purchased for $500 or 1/8th the price. Calling a hearing aid an medical device is not totally correct.'

Yes MD's and audiologists are still required in the loop to insure good hearing. They just do not have to be paid a few thousand dollars for a few hours of work like they are today. Do not expect them to start working for $200 an hour without a nasty fight.

The prices of $5K-$6K per pair is not supported by the facts but by the distribution methods. With 8000 baby boomers turning 60 years of age each DAY the market is about to ZOOM. The prices must tumble because others will work for less than $4K an hour selling hearing aids.

No the local sellers are not evil people. They just do not know how to sell in high volume to offer volume pricing. The makers of hearing aids are NO rush to change the distribution methods.

[DanInStereo]

Well, it has been over 2 years now with the digital hearing aids. I met with the Phonak representative back in spring. Her husband also works for them, and reportedly fitted the legendary Les Paul with his current set of hearing aids.

We tried her setting suggestions. Alas, they did not work. The physical limitations of the input devices is not going to be overcome by changing lines of code. Two months ago, we tried cranking the output gain. I could hear mice farting from 20 paces, but the problems with the live music persisted. Last month, we got to try a new machine in her office. It places transducers in your ear canal that hear what your HA is putting into your ear. Unfortnately, the Feedback Tone Generator was reactivated, and I was living in a trippy, swirling, Pink Floyd kind of world until I could get an appointment asap to shut the damn thing off.

Tell the truth, the enhanced gain, and the configured settings via the in ear tranducer, were fantastic, for everything except talking on my cell phone and, you guessed it, live music.

Just for smiles and giggles, my appointment yesterday was to bring in my surviving analog HA (tragedy befell my left analog HA, it was dropped, ceased functioning, and I have been utterly unable to find anybody who can repair it). Very interesting to see the graph showing how the analog rolled off after 3K vs the 8K of the digital (no wonder why everything sounded papery and shrill). Fine, I can live with that, the extra information was turning out to be useful.

In desperation to reclaim live music, we had the digital tailored to match the output of the analog. Gone was all that high frequency extra information. Unfortunately, the inability of the HA to handle live music persisted. So, right now, I've got the worst of both worlds happening until my next appointment. I've lost the digital extended information, and I still don't have the ability to experience live music as it is intended.

My audi is at her nerve's ends with me. She has no idea where to go forward from here. Apparently both Unitron and K-amp are no longer made. She said the K-amp would not be strong enough for my situation, and that the Unitron was promising, but like I said, no longer made.

I think I am going back to my plan to scour funeral parlors, nursing homes, coroner's offices, etc, in an effort to score some 332s. Now I wish I had gone the engineering route in school, because I'd start working for some HA companies until a D/A converter that can handle live music type peaks is finally a reality.

6 thousand dollars, over 2 years of wearing them, and I'm still not convinced digital is superior. I am losing the will to live.

[Dylan73]

I am losing the will to live.

I have read your whole story here.
Sad story it is :(

I am now just starting this struggle...
to find a digital after the amalogue HA-world...

I am trying Phonak Extra now, and hey, I am not satisfied so far...
Who knows how long patience will endure - both mine and my audi's...

Guess we need keep on keeping on...

[Lancaster]

I'm still not convinced digital is superior.
Digital is superior only from a technological point of view. The sound itself is analog, the microphone converts the sound into an analog signal and after some processing (either analog or digital) the receiver converts the electric signal again into an analog sound.

"Digital" is purely a technical matter and a honest marketing should have never use this term.

[Lancaster]

KAMP is a hearing aid circuit made by Etymotic Research:

http://www.etymotic.com/ha/kamp.aspx

K-AMP hearing aids are available by special request from the following manufacturers:
General Hearing Instruments 800-824-3021 www.generalhearing.com
Prairie Labs, Inc. 800-322-8238
K-AMP was largely used by manufacturers such as Siemens (Viva, Cosmea) Unitron (Icon) and many others.

[jwilliams]

I have been a analog user for aproximately 27 years. I have tried on several occasions to switch to the digital process. I honestly do not like digital for several reasons. One, I am accostomed to the analog and they are sooo comfortable. I don't mind the extra noise in the background and have my tv captions to rely on. Two, I don't need all the advancements and different levels of sounds. It is irritating to me to have to make the switch. Three, the digital is really expensive to acquire even if you have insurance.
I am currently trying to find another company that still makes the mini- analog hearing aids. Rexton is no longer making them and have started to work with Siemens. My audiologist is having me try the programmable and the sound is not even comparable to this. The hard thing is that companies that make the aids aren't making it for them and aren't realizing that there are many of us who just like simple items and nothing complicated.
Hi there

Here here!!! I couldn't agree more and yes I am in the same situation. I have worn analogue hearing aids for 39 years and would love to see the return of analogue hearing aids. We should be given a choice! Bring back those lovely Phonak Superfront pp-c-2'd's. Has anyone had them and managed to switch to digital ones successfully and able to hear music clearly without any distortion! The simplest things in life are often the best - so I totally agree with all the bad comments about digital hearing aids. The problem is how do we get them to go back to manufacturing good old analogues again - a campaign maybe the way forward - what do you think?
Regards
Julia

[RobTop]

Dan,
Like you I am attempting to be a muso. I have found new aids to be a totally unacceptable replacement for my Phonak SonoFortes. I have contacted a Canadian specialising in aids for musos. He may be the one you're looking for. He couldn't really help me but this is what he said.
"Hi John:
The reason your new hearing aids don't work as well as the old ones is that the newer digital ones need to have a limiter or ceiling that is placed just after the microphone. This "ceiling" ensures that overly loud sounds don't get in to the analog to digital converter (A/D converter). Most A/D converters cannot handle overly loud sounds. Its not that the sound of the music would be too loud for you; its more of an issue with many modern hearing aids where the A/D converter has limitations, especially for louder inputs such as music. I suspect that the newer aid can't handle the louder inputs. "Aid #3" in one of my articles was the Siemens Acuris, if memory serves me correctly. I have attached a manuscript of an article that was published in June 2007 in the Canadian Hearing Report (which is the official magazine of the Canadian Academy of Audiology). It explains this in some more detail.
Hope this helps.
Marshall"
His name is Marshal Chasin. email:marshall.chasin@rogers.com
His article can be found on the net. http://www.musiciansclinics.com/home.asp
Please let's know if it's helpful.
Regards,
John
John, thanks for this information - I always was wondering how digital aids get the enormous dynamic range of real world into uncompressed digital input format. To my opinion, good analog frontends should compress dynamics prior to digitizing. You speak about utterly limiting. This explains limited performance and/or distortion with louder sound. No matter how: uncarefully designed compression frontends may introduce distortion and destroys part of the digital achievements.

Let's imagine: We wanna hear sounds as low as 30 dB ranging up to 120 dB without distortion. Ergo: 90 dB dynamic range. When we consider that 30dB sound should be digitized with at least 5 bit resolution this will result in a necessary 20 bit ADC resolution. Today not that problem. Actually the problem is in failing exact specification in datasheet. I believe that the manufacturers aren't willing to say that their sophisticated products still need a bit analog technology, and second: a better frontend would foil the goal of having pure digital technology.

[xbulder]

Yes they are better in a technical sense but that does not insure they are better for everyone.

Hearing like vision is not a technical/physiological process but is a psychological process. If they were a physiological processes then eye witnesses standing side by side would file identical reports of what they saw when viewing an accident in progress but often do not.

Both vision and hearing (well all senses) results are a mental process. If a person hears well with an analog aid it does not insure a digital aid will be better. I think this could be more pronounced in a 70 year old vs a 7 year old wearer of hearing aids.

Digital computers are great but some still prefer to write letters by hand. There may be a downside to the digital aids not often discussed.

If local fitters are only promoting $5K to $6K digital sets when an $800 set would have made the person in need of hearing aids happy does it not perhaps limit the number of people with corrected hearing?

We know if top of the line can be purchase factory direct for around $1000 and the shops are selling them for $3000 there should be a gross margin of about $2300 per ear if they can rope one into spending $3000.

Wal-Mart initially lowered prices by reducing distribution costs. Companies like America Hears are starting to do the same thing in the hearing aid market and other distribution models with be introduced. In five years from now America Hears may be selling top of the line aids for $500. Some of us can remember when a run of the mill PC was $4K and now 100 fold improved run of the mill PC can be purchased for $500 or 1/8th the price. Calling a hearing aid an medical device is not totally correct.'

Yes MD's and audiologists are still required in the loop to insure good hearing. They just do not have to be paid a few thousand dollars for a few hours of work like they are today. Do not expect them to start working for $200 an hour without a nasty fight.

The prices of $5K-$6K per pair is not supported by the facts but by the distribution methods. With 8000 baby boomers turning 60 years of age each DAY the market is about to ZOOM. The prices must tumble because others will work for less than $4K an hour selling hearing aids.

No the local sellers are not evil people. They just do not know how to sell in high volume to offer volume pricing. The makers of hearing aids are NO rush to change the distribution methods.

yesterday 6,000$ are todays $1,000---

In 3 or 4 years time something like a Exelia or epoq or pure should cost 1000$
I think AH will have a hard time keeping up.... Perharps you are right AH
they will have to lower their prices even further....

I have a tons of friends from europe, Asia and South America- this has never
been an issue for this? Perhaps is this an American Thing?

[EricFlatpick]

We hear you! One thing to do might to be start looking for high quality programmable analog aids, and an audiologist who will fit you with them. Phonak has an analog aid for "profound loss" folks, called "Superfront". They're at http://www.phonak.com/consumer/products/instruments/classic/superfront.htm. If you find any others, and like them, please let us know.

[Eagle]

As an audiologist I feel sorry for my analog users who have been essentially left behind by manufacturers. 50% of my analog users will never like digital aids. I don't care how expensive they are or what bells and whistles they add on. I have even had some patients buy 2-3 sets of linear power BTEs with the thought they may not have any available at some point. (Yes I did give them a huge discount) The fact is most of my analog users want a power analog with a directional mic. I have one patient that comes in every month with a new website or hearing aid he has heard about. In the end they never have all the features or sound he would like. I really feel bad for him. Many patients I see disregard their hearing as secondary at best. Here is someone who really wants to do well and he has no options. Believe me, to audiologists who care, this is very upsetting.

Eagle

[Eagle]

We hear you! One thing to do might to be start looking for high quality programmable analog aids, and an audiologist who will fit you with them. Phonak has an analog aid for "profound loss" folks, called "Superfront". They're at http://www.phonak.com/consumer/products/instruments/classic/superfront.htm. If you find any others, and like them, please let us know.

I believe Superfronts are not programmable. Trim pot only, but I could be wrong.

[EricFlatpick]

If analog aids just amplify "what's out there" (a notion I've had more than one audiologist bring up), and digital aids convert that, selectively, by programming, before we hear it, which is likelier to deliver sound that resembles "what's out there"? Apparently what we've got to get used to with digital aids is a more doctored sound. This might work out for the better IF the audiologist really knows the equipment and the patient, but ...

One of my audis told me recently that hearing aids and music "don't go together"--before either he or his colleague had even mentioned that there was a music program for the aids I am trying out. Is there something wrong with this picture?

[EricFlatpick]

Hmm. Hope you get some satisfaction. I'm in a surprisingly (ok, maybe not surprising at all) similar situation, with a worn-out pair of old Phonak Sonofortes (programmable analog, fine for live music), and (3rd model tried) Elevas on Tweak #3, with the Phonak rep coming next week.

[DanInStereo]

We hear you! One thing to do might to be start looking for high quality programmable analog aids, and an audiologist who will fit you with them. Phonak has an analog aid for "profound loss" folks, called "Superfront". They're at http://www.phonak.com/consumer/products/instruments/classic/superfront.htm. If you find any others, and like them, please let us know.

I believe these are not programmable analog, my audi told me Phonak does not make such a device at all, any more.

I'd still like to find a NOS (new old stock) pair (or 2 or 3 pairs) of the 332 XAZ. Should have gotten them while I could have back in the day.

[EricFlatpick]

Thank you for sharing that. I guess I could "get used to" the crappy sound of an Eleva I'm trying out, but why pay more for something that doesn't give the same speech comprehension or sound quality?

[blackmamba]

Sorry to see you folks have not found your answer to having great sound in a digital aid. I guess it must be like an the audiophyle purest comparing sound recorded on a record compared to a processed digital cd.

Have you tried the Widex Mind440 m4-m-CB with a bandwidth of over 10kHz ?

[DanInStereo]

Sorry to see you folks have not found your answer to having great sound in a digital aid. I guess it must be like an the audiophyle purest comparing sound recorded on a record compared to a processed digital cd.

Have you tried the Widex Mind440 m4-m-CB with a bandwidth of over 10kHz ?

high power? BTE?

[blackmamba]

It is a micro BTE model with a ClearBand hi-fi two-way receiver. Only the Mind440 m4-m-CB however has a bandwidth of over 10kHz in the Mind models. This is not a power model and is for minimal to moderately hearing loss.

[Lancaster]

Sorry to see you folks have not found your answer to having great sound in a digital aid. I guess it must be like an the audiophyle purest comparing sound recorded on a record compared to a processed digital cd.

Have you tried the Widex Mind440 m4-m-CB with a bandwidth of over 10kHz ?
Have you tried to listen to an FM radio station using a receiver with vacuum tubes? The bandwith of the receiver has nothing to do with the sound of vacuum tubes. The sound is "full" and yet "soft" and no digital device can do that. Of course, a digital device can play two audiostreams together, without mixing them, and this will help you to discriminate speech. But a digital device still sounds like a police transceiver :p , the sound is unpleasant, no matter how clear it is.

This is why people still like to use Phonak Sonoforte and if you had the opportunity to use them, you would like them too.

[Normandy]

I made the switch from analog to digital (http://www.hearsource.com/index.html) about 5 years ago. I don't have the most profound loss (High frequencies at about 65 to 70) but I hated my analog aids. Way too much background noise and an ever present squeal. I guess it depends on the wearer, the hearing loss, and what you get used to. Good luck.

[EnglishDispenser]

the sound is "full" and yet "soft" and no digital device can do that.
A digital system can emulate ANYTHING, as long as the ADCs have enough resolution and the sample rate is high enough.

Sooo ... a digital system can indeed be devised to emulate a valve/tube system.

[Normandy]

Digital is superior only from a technological point of view. The sound itself is analog, the microphone converts the sound into an analog signal and after some processing (either analog or digital (http://www.hearsource.com/index.html)) the receiver converts the electric signal again into an analog sound.

"Digital" is purely a technical matter and a honest marketing should have never use this term.

Thank goodness someone finally says it. NO ONE hears in "digital". Everyone hears in analog. The electronic amplifiers can be what ever in between the microphone and speaker. I think that some of the problem maybe that the hearing aid industry has miniaturized the microphones and speakers to the point that they may sound wimpy or not full bodied enough for old hearing aid users that are accustomed to older and larger units with more robust electronic components..

[John59]

In my opinion the only problem with digital hearing aids is ....
you guessed right ..
the software and hardware to program the digital hearing aids is typically controlled by non- users of the hearing aids..

:mad:

[blackmamba]

Stereo buffs have been arguing about this forever. Tubes/analog virsus digital sound. The future is digital and there is no looking back however. Thank God for that because we can only look forward too greater things happening in the future of hearing and hearing aids. Where can we go with Analog ? The answer is nowhere because what has been done has been done. So i guess if you want to wear big clunky chunks of plastic on your ears because you say they are the pinnacle or ultimate of Hearing Aids then i say Go for it . With myself i will stick with my digital/bluetooth hearing aids and my digital Audio equipment . The only time in my opinion when you can have some real fun with analog is when you overdrive that guitar tube amp for distortion . ALA Jimi Hendrix style !

[JohnC]

I had a bit of difficulty getting used to digital, and I needed more adjustments than thought I would, but it was well worth it.

I hear much better now and the improvement is speech recognition is immeasurable.

[Styncfaf73]

theoretically, yes. While those 7" jukebox records are 45RPMs, they were mass market items produced on a budget. Not all of them sounded better than their LP counterparts.

[Lancaster]

The future is digital and there is no looking back however. Thank God for that because we can only look forward too greater things happening in the future of hearing and hearing aids. Where can we go with Analog ?
Only the technology inside the hearing aids is digital.
The sound itself is analog by nature. And the way your eardrum is reacting is analog too.
The most sophisticated digital hearing aid may process sounds on 64 channels, but finally it puts all those channels together and delivers analog sound to your ear.

50 years ago, "digital" was just an idea. 50 years from now, "digital" may become as obsolete as the tape recording today. But the sound itself and the eardrum will remain analog, that's for sure.

[xbulder]

Only the technology inside the hearing aids is digital.
The sound itself is analog by nature. And the way your eardrum is reacting is analog too.
The most sophisticated digital hearing aid may process sounds on 64 channels, but finally it puts all those channels together and delivers analog sound to your ear.

50 years ago, "digital" was just an idea. 50 years from now, "digital" may become as obsolete as the tape recording today. But the sound itself and the eardrum will remain analog, that's for sure.

this is wrong, the most sofisticated instrument DOES NOT HAVE 64 CHANNELS.
this is untrue.

[Lancaster]

this is wrong, the most sofisticated instrument DOES NOT HAVE 64 CHANNELS.
this is untrue.

This is not the point! You can do better than that, try again!

What is untrue? Are those channels (2, 3, 9, 16 or 32) not put together in the end? Is the sound delivered by the receiver not analog?
Could you explain the concept of "digital" the way you understand it yourself?

[Um bongo]

Only the technology inside the hearing aids is digital.
The sound itself is analog by nature. And the way your eardrum is reacting is analog too.
The most sophisticated digital hearing aid may process sounds on 64 channels, but finally it puts all those channels together and delivers analog sound to your ear.

50 years ago, "digital" was just an idea. 50 years from now, "digital" may become as obsolete as the tape recording today. But the sound itself and the eardrum will remain analog, that's for sure.

Have a look at the bernafon channel-free for instruments that nominally have a few thousand 'channels'.

As you say either side of the instrument there's an a-d and d-a stage either integrated into the transducers or the amplifier circuit. Are you suggesting that there will be no quantisation stage in the future? I find this unlikely as you can't process the signal without sampling it at some stage.

If you are suggesting that the basic signal is just in need of enhancement to remedy the impedance mismatch of somebody with a hearing loss, you're right and it's essentially what 'open' hearing systems do now.

[Lancaster]

Are you suggesting that there will be no quantisation stage in the future? I find this unlikely as you can't process the signal without sampling it at some stage.

What I'm suggesting is that the quantisation is necessary today only because we want it so.
The way we are using the digital technology is like filling a 40-ton dump truck with a teaspoon and also counting how many teaspoons were necessary to fill it :p

We, as humans, can better understand what we are doing if we are using the digital technology to process the signal . But the eardrum itself needs no quantisation at all. And for the last 100 years, the hearings aids don't need it too. It is just a matter of today's technology.

[Um bongo]

What I'm suggesting is that the quantisation is necessary today only because we want it so.
The way we are using the digital technology is like filling a 40-ton dump truck with a teaspoon and also counting how many teaspoons were necessary to fill it :p

We, as humans, can better understand what we are doing if we are using the digital technology to process the signal . But the eardrum itself needs no quantisation at all. And for the last 100 years, the hearings aids don't need it too. It is just a matter of today's technology.

Problem is though, in order to properly modify the signal you have to digitise it.

Your 100 years statement is a straw-man; look at photography - for a 100 years it was all about film and became a mature industry on the back of it - in a decade it's been wiped out by digitisation.

The first digital pictures contained many processing artifacts, sharpness issues, colour balance - now even compact digital cameras can produce higher resolution pictures than 35mm film. However the cameras can also recognise faces and focus on them, AND are able to correct for the errors of the poor photographer.

You could use telephones as another example, or even the fieldbus electronic systems that push your electric windows in your car.

The eardrum isn't the sensing mechanism in the system - it's the cochlear, which, let's face it, is a fantastic self tuning quantisation mechanism. SO in answer to your original question; do we hear in analogue, no we don't as the signal is processed in individual nerve pulses which can be on or off - you could denote these with a 1 or a 0, which oddly enough is a binary system OR the basic block of ALL digital systems.

[Kadougan]

@ Um Bongo, Love the analogy of cilia producing a "digital" signal which is interpreted by the brain. :)

[xbulder]

This is not the point! You can do better than that, try again!

What is untrue? Are those channels (2, 3, 9, 16 or 32) not put together in the end? Is the sound delivered by the receiver not analog?
Could you explain the concept of "digital" the way you understand it yourself?

speech understanding is maximize when you reach about 4 or 5 channels.
remember about bandwith, what good does it provide to have a 64 channels
in such a narrow bandwith right?.

Our friend UM bongo, brings an interesting point about channel free and how
it delays time. He will be able to talk more about channel free

[Um bongo]

@ Um Bongo, Love the analogy of cilia producing a "digital" signal which is interpreted by the brain. :)

I've always 'read' it like this - I suppose it comes from being an engineer first and a dispensing audiologist second.

The fact that there are other parallels, like the system running on micro-volts, the self-tuning aspect involving both the efferent and afferent cycles AND the fact that the brain accomodates the loss of sensitivity without similar apparent loss of loudness: All puts me in mind of the requisite functions of a hearing aid.

What most people fail to understand is that their normal hearing was controlled by a lightspeed super-computer, that we still don't have the technical nous to replicate. Even that super-computer is capable of error. Realistically, the fact that ANY hearing system can compete with this kind of system is a bit of a miracle.

[Lancaster]

The eardrum isn't the sensing mechanism in the system - it's the cochlear, which, let's face it, is a fantastic self tuning quantisation mechanism. SO in answer to your original question; do we hear in analogue, no we don't as the signal is processed in individual nerve pulses which can be on or off - you could denote these with a 1 or a 0, which oddly enough is a binary system OR the basic block of ALL digital systems.

Well, when it comes to cochlear implants, you're right.

But the "normal" hearing aids are offering information to the eardrum, not to the cochlea. Maybe it will be cool to become some sort of a robot, with the auditory nerve directly excited by digital electric pulses. But for all mammals, the natural way of receiving sounds is based on the sound propagation by air pressure variations and oscillations of the eardrum. And that is 100% analog.

The real debate here should be "linear vs. non-linear", not "analog vs. digital"

Problem is though, in order to properly modify the signal you have to digitise it.
This is the only approach, when it comes to digital technology.
But the digital technology itself is just an approach, just one way to do things, not the only way. This is what you can't grasp.

[Um bongo]

Well, when it comes to cochlear implants, you're right.

But the "normal" hearing aids are offering information to the eardrum, not to the cochlea. Maybe it will be cool to become some sort of a robot, with the auditory nerve directly excited by digital electric pulses. But for all mammals, the natural way of receiving sounds is based on the sound propagation by air pressure variations and oscillations of the eardrum. And that is 100% analog.

The real debate here should be "linear vs. non-linear", not "analog vs. digital"


This is the only approach, when it comes to digital technology.
But the digital technology itself is just an approach, just one way to do things, not the only way. This is what you can't grasp.

All the eardrum (and middle ear mechanism) does is correct the impedance mismatch caused by the fact that we don't live in water any more - it gives the cochlear more 'catching surface' - the way the link works further back is semantics - it's like discussing what gets pumped down the wires to the receivers (which can be either digital or analogue incidentally)

If you want to shift the goal-posts and argue about compression that's fine - but you'll actually find that compression was well established before digital took over. K-Amp etc. It's one of the few ways of reintroducing a dynamic range within a loss.

I agree that digital isn't the be-all and end-all in this type of situation, especially as temporal issues are a problem. However barring a paradigm shift that would see the fairly unlikely reversal of Moore's Law, the degree of benefit obtained from being able to process a signal digitally, far out-weighs the perceived downsides. It's not perfect, but it does provide a quick and an albeit slightly dirty solution to the situation.

I think if you credit us with a little wider 'grasp', we'd be able to have a better debate about it.

[Lancaster]

I agree that digital isn't the be-all and end-all in this type of situation, especially as temporal issues are a problem. However barring a paradigm shift that would see the fairly unlikely reversal of Moore's Law, the degree of benefit obtained from being able to process a signal digitally, far out-weighs the perceived downsides. It's not perfect, but it does provide a quick and an albeit slightly dirty solution to the situation.

I think if you credit us with a little wider 'grasp', we'd be able to have a better debate about it.

I definitely credited you with a little wider "grasp", when you wrote things like those quoted above, than when you used such logic fallacies:

The first digital pictures contained many processing artifacts, sharpness issues, colour balance - now even compact digital cameras can produce higher resolution pictures than 35mm film. However the cameras can also recognise faces and focus on them, AND are able to correct for the errors of the poor photographer.

You could use telephones as another example, or even the fieldbus electronic systems that push your electric windows in your car.

This is why the digital hearing aids are better than their analog counterparts, because digital cameras can recognize faces and focus on them while film camera don't ? :D

[Um bongo]

I definitely credited you with a little wider "grasp", when you wrote things like those quoted above, than when you used such logic fallacies:

Which logic fallacies? The acknowledgement of Moore's law? The suggestion of Technological Determinism or a fairly reasonable understanding of the motivating factors of the industry having worked at component supply, hearing aid manufacturer and dispensing levels.

I'll ask you two questions; who buys hearing aids? and why?


This is why the digital hearing aids are better than their analog counterparts, because digital cameras can recognize faces and focus on them while film camera don't ? :D

Pattern recognition is a significant development in modern technology. Acoustically it means that you can voice dial from your Nokia WITHOUT having to pre-record the sounds. An analogue system is incapable of this.

I'm assuming you're just on a Troll from here in.

[goodscoolxh]

I would like to say that i have used the digital hearing aid, i have to admit that it's really better than Analog hearing aids , and i believe that one day it will replace the Analog hearing aids .

[Lancaster]

Pattern recognition is a significant development in modern technology. Acoustically it means that you can voice dial from your Nokia WITHOUT having to pre-record the sounds. An analogue system is incapable of this.
As your previous story about digital vs. film camera, this is simply non sequitur too.

Pattern recognition may help one day a HA wearer to recognize a voice among 300 others and to continue to listen that voice, in a totally noisy environment. But this has nothing to do with the real need of a hearing aid.

I'm assuming you're just on a Troll from here in.
I'm assuming you already proved your limits in thinking. You are just like a fan of a sports team. And for a fan, everything his team does is right and everything the other team does is wrong.

[Um bongo]

As your previous story about digital vs. film camera, this is simply non sequitur too.

Pattern recognition may help one day a HA wearer to recognize a voice among 300 others and to continue to listen that voice, in a totally noisy environment. But this has nothing to do with the real need of a hearing aid.


I'm assuming you already proved your limits in thinking. You are just like a fan of a sports team. And for a fan, everything his team does is right and everything the other team does is wrong.

So pattern recognition has nothing to do with hearing aids being able to identify speech in noise and apply expansion to it or appropriate compression to the background sound? What is your opinion of the 'real need for a hearing aid'

Thanks for the insult about my thinking, as it goes, I'm not a digital fanboy at all, realising that basically all processing introduces some corruption to the signal. Any a-d is going to give you temporal issues, compression doesn't sound 'right', but it's the best we have.

However, if you've got a better idea of a way of correcting the impedance mismatch between the sounds in the real world AND the failing human ear, I'm sure the leading hearing aid manufacturers will be all over you like a rash. Until then, digital seems to be winning.

So unless you've got an organic/micro-machined/implantable/babelfish type of invention sitting in your pocket - I'll take the digital route for now.

[awilson0414]

Most hearing aids are digital now but some can be programmed to analog. I know www.hearsource.com has a self programmer that can adjust the compression to be analog versus more digital.
I think it is in the opinion of the wearer as to if digital is better and also the type of loss. If you are accustomed to the loud analog sound, you want that power and digitals are much quieter which some people don't like.

[ziibiin]

Simulation, I think so!

[bwaylimited]

I wear both analog and digital aids , but prefer my analog aids because they enable me to hear backround noise outdoors more accurately. This is important to me because I am visually impaired and need to be aware of what is going on around me. To be perfectly blunt, I think digital hearing aids have been oversold. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the major manufacturers of these products have colluded to keep prices artificially high. Price fixing seems to be the rule. I don't understand why the FTC has not vigorously investigated the industry's pricing practices. And I wouldn't be surprised if audiologists receive kickbacks and other incentives to push certain brands of digital aids. So their recommendations may not always be the in the best interests of their patients. I purchased a pair of Acoustitone Pro analog BTE aids online for only $310, and as far as I'm concerned,they are superior to any analog aids ever prescribed for me by an audiologist. And, in many ways, they are also superior to my $3000 custom Phonak digital ITE's. Gerald I have found in my practice that the Digital hearing aids in general are far superior in quality, especially in noisy environments.

There are many articles about this.

I have seen one posted at this link: http://www.hearingaidinformation.org/page04.html

[EnglishDispenser]

Price fixing seems to be the rule.
In some cases maybe.

However this accusation generally seems to indicate that US customers simply don't want to spend money and seek someone to 'blame'.

"I could make a digital hearing aid on my kitchen table ...."

However you don't seem to hear the same sort of comment about heart pacemakers. I bet they cost less than a hearing aid, but cost more to buy and have fitted. However you don't want to upset the surgeon do you??? However hearing aid dispenser are clearly Spawn Of The Devil ... sheesh ...

In the UK where most people get FREE hearing aids from the State, you don't hear cries of 'price fixing' relating to the private sector.

[bwaylimited]

Audiologists and hearing aid manufacturers love to confuse consumers with a lot of techno-babble and marketing hype. They regard digital hearing aids as disposable commodities, an attitude many consumers resent. Then they whine that only 30% of hearing inpaired consumers wear hearing aids. Well, maybe if they stopped pushing expensive digital aids and made an effort to address the patient's real needs, they would gain more credibility. Many people I know have as much respect for audiologists as they do for used-car salesmen. The industry really needs to clean up its act. There is still a place for inexpensive analog hearing aids. And they can be purchased online without a prescription from an audiologist. Hopefully, more and more consumers will discover this option. Then Maybe audiologists will finally get the message. Gerald In some cases maybe.

However this accusation generally seems to indicate that US customers simply don't want to spend money and seek someone to 'blame'.

"I could make a digital hearing aid on my kitchen table ...."

However you don't seem to hear the same sort of comment about heart pacemakers. I bet they cost less than a hearing aid, but cost more to buy and have fitted. However you don't want to upset the surgeon do you??? However hearing aid dispenser are clearly Spawn Of The Devil ... sheesh ...

In the UK where most people get FREE hearing aids from the State, you don't hear cries of 'price fixing' relating to the private sector.

[zafdor]

To be perfectly blunt, I think digital hearing aids have been oversold. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the major manufacturers of these products have colluded to keep prices artificially high. Price fixing seems to be the rule. I don't understand why the FTC has not vigorously investigated the industry's pricing practices. And I wouldn't be surprised if audiologists receive kickbacks and other incentives to push certain brands of digital aids.

Everyone's hearing is different. Analog instruments are pretty limited in what they can do, but based on the sound (no pun intended) of things this works great for you. The possibilities for sound processing in the digital domain are almost endless and many (me included) benefit from this. The performance of digital instruments available have more then enough compute performance to emulate anything an analog instrument could do.

There is no item beat to death more then the business model (cost) of the instrument in every hearing aid forum I've ever participated in. As a believer in capitalism, I think everyone needs to vote with their dollars as you have done. Unfortunately, most HI people are elderly so they won't be able to cut their costs 70+% by buying the instrument on ebay and self programming like PVC. Perhaps costco and america hears will have an impact? If you really need an instrument you can land one for <$1K, if you are looking at instruments $3K and up then you obviously have disposable income and may 'buy into' the business model we have today.

[ed121]

Analog vs Digital........horse vs automobile. On top of that, just think about the limited battery power......analog is power hungry.

Regarding, the methods of manufacturing/marketing of aids. Just keep in mind that it is a business....with all the ethics of a business both good and bad. Like any business transaction: "Caveat Emptor". Ed

[Jake1230]

Well, I prefer Lyrics (They're Analog) and they are Great.

[Tomek]

About digital hearing aids, it's a big illusion to say it's better than analog.

Many say that it's not possible to programme, to eliminate larsen with analog, it's not true. With analog, it's all possible like digital.

I have been wearing analog for 33 years, I am a severe hearing impaired person (90 dB), I don't understand sign language, I speak only, I don't have deaf accent, I don't live with deafs, I studied chemical engineering at the university.

For me, analog is more effective than digital, because analog is very simple and there is no "karaoke" effect, the response time is very fast without echo. On the other side with digital, the response time is slow with echo, because digital is a minicomputer with processor, it's long to convert from analog to digital to calculate, then from digital to analog to hear. Digital consumes a lot of batteries.

[dsi1]

Analog vs Digital........horse vs automobile. On top of that, just think about the limited battery power......analog is power hungry.

Regarding, the methods of manufacturing/marketing of aids. Just keep in mind that it is a business....with all the ethics of a business both good and bad. Like any business transaction: "Caveat Emptor". Ed

The old analog aids will typically have a battery drain of around .6 or 7. mA but I've seen some circuits with a drain in the .4 mA or even less. I was dismayed to find that the digital circuits will typically have a drain of around 1.0 mA and higher.

The new aids with wireless capabilities will probably present an even higher load for the battery. This is to be expected. The new aids are actually software-driven micro computers with sound processing capabilities. I can only imagine that the trend will be greater RAM and higher clock speeds - the same as computers and hand held devices. My guess is that battery life will be even shorter before they start designing less power hungry digitals.

[fahad]

I used to wear digital hearing aids in middle school and high school. I was able to hear the teachers, but not other students in the class.

After about 12 years of use, it got to a point that I would struggle even in a one-on-one situation. I tried numerous companies, yet none of the hearing aids worked. I gave up for a few years and continued on with my old aids.

Finally, I tried a few hearing aids and got to try Siemens Prisma 2 (digital programmable). These worked like a charm! I was able to hear fairly well. Over the past 7 years I did not feel the inability to hear even once. But not the aids are getting old and I am again feeling unable to hear. My hearing has remained relatively stable.

I have tried Oticon W, which was really good at hearing other people's sound, but I hate the way I sound. I am very frustrated. I am currently trying Siemens Motion 301, but so far it is also not helping.

------------------------------
L 250-60, 500-55, 1000-70, 2000-70, 4000-85, 8000-70
R 250-50, 500-50, 1000-65, 2000-70, 4000-70, 8000-60

Digital programmable hearing aids are mostly phased out, and almost all manufacturers are now going purely digital. But at least for me so far digital technology has been a disappointment. If I had known this 7 years ago, I honestly would have bought extra Siemens Prisma 2 (Digital Programmable).

[nilsson]

I'm a cookie biter and have been wearing a combo of Siemens/Phonak analog HA for 6 years. Now that my hearing has ratcheted down several notches, I'm trialing versions of Phonak and Unitron -- neither works anywhere near as well as my old analogs, so, thus far (I've been to the audiologist 12 times!), I think it's digital hype.

[gera229]

Do any of you analog users have a hard time hearing other people in noisy environments? Like at a theme park or when a lot of people are talking in one room.

I tested my Siemens S1+ analog and compared they to my Senso Diva's sd-19 digital (although it is hard to hear in noisy places) I guess I'm just used to digital that makes it seem that with the analog hearing aids it sounds blurred out and not as clear as it does with my Diva's. I had an excellent doctor in UC Davis, now I moved to Kaiser, I hope they have good doc's there too.

[Mariondale25]

this is best but you also need to set the compresion ratios to be linear

[bwaylimited]

As I have mentioned on another thread, I am extremely satisfied with my Acoustitone Pro analog BTE aids. They are rugged, reliable, comfortable and have excellent sound quality. And they cost only $310 a pair. I prefer them to my $3000 pair of Phonak custome digital aids which are constantly breaking down. Audiologists and other skeptics who dismiss analog hearing aids as "inferior" to digital have never actually worn both types themselves. Their judgements are clouded by marketing hype and not actual studies. Nobody has ever proven in a double-blind study that digital aids are superior to analog aids. The wearer always knows what sounds best, not the dispenser. Don't ever let a so-called expert tell you otherwise. Gerald
I've been wearing hearing aids for 44 years, I've seen a lot in the way of advances of technology. I am also a musician (supreme being has a strange sense of humor). I've been struggling for over a month now to get my new digital hearing aids (Phonak Savia) to work in an acceptable fashion.

I think the digital is trying too hard to be clever when it doesn't really need to be. I've had Phonak's Sono-forte, programmable, with remote. These were the best hearing aids I've had, flat out bar none. Unfortunately, they are over 10 years old. I was hoping for digital to be a new level up, just like the analog Sono-forte were.

My biggest complaint is the oversensitivity of the noise suppression programs. My audi is telling me that federal regulations say 'xyz' decibels are not allowed. My own voice, when raised, trips the device. Accents on the guitar trips it. A hand clap sets it off. This is ridiculous. Transients are not the same as contiinuous loudness ie: industrial machinery. Furthermore, I'm a musician, I can't be having my hearing aids going 'click' all throughout passages. I've brought my guitar (and amp) to my audi's office. She felt some of the accents were pretty loud. Well, duh, they're supposed to be. Have you ever heard a classical orchestra? They're pretty loud. At the current settings of my hearing aids, they'd be just about shut down during the forte passages.

I just saw my audi on monday. All this week, I've been in audio purgatory. Know that little beeping thing your car does when you put your key in the ignition? Well, I'm getting a secondary 'echo' tone, that sounds like the feedback suppression test tone. Listening to Mozart, the flute and piccolo parts, especially when used as long notes behind a melody line, swell and smear with digital snarl. On my guitar, every note above the open B string sounds buzzy as all heck (and it is not the guitar, checked it with my old analogs, it is fine). The weird thing is, this didn't happen in the office monday morning. My batteries ended up going dead monday night. I'm wondering if the programming we did earlier that day was affected by weak batteries?

[gera229]

I'm wearing digital hearing aids Divex Senso Diva and I prefer them over my old analog Siemen hearing aids. If you are a long analog user you will have a definitely hard time to adjust and there are people in this forum that actually think they made the right decision to move from analog to digital.

And analog hearing aids are not so good in noisy environments like digitals. Also digital hearing aids might as well be better for those who have a moderately-severe and worse hearing loss.

Good audiologists do test hearing aid quality and compare them with the hearing aid stethoscope.

@bwaylimited You should try different types of digital hearing aids. Remember Phonaks' aren't the best for everyone. Some prefer Starkey to be far superior to Phonaks.

Digital hearing aids have excellent sound quality and they are crisp. If you are living on a budget and cannot afford higher end hearing aids or having a hard time affording them, then it's up to you. You can always have a free trial for hearing aids for up to 30 or even 60 days.

[Um bongo]

As I have mentioned on another thread, I am extremely satisfied with my Acoustitone Pro analog BTE aids. They are rugged, reliable, comfortable and have excellent sound quality. And they cost only $310 a pair. I prefer them to my $3000 pair of Phonak custome digital aids which are constantly breaking down. Audiologists and other skeptics who dismiss analog hearing aids as "inferior" to digital have never actually worn both types themselves. Their judgements are clouded by marketing hype and not actual studies. Nobody has ever proven in a double-blind study that digital aids are superior to analog aids. The wearer always knows what sounds best, not the dispenser. Don't ever let a so-called expert tell you otherwise. Gerald

I'm not going to dispute any part of your argument, even a broken watch is right twice a day.

Properly tuned analogue aids can work really well. Just like a vinyl record can provide great sound through a good stereo.

It doesn't alter the fact that digitisation allows more signal manipulation, control of multiple noise sources, speech enhancement, feedback control, directional enhancement, expansion etc.etc.

It's like having a digital mixing desk in-front of you or not. You can use the refinements to obtain the optimum solution: that's all.