Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 63

Thread: Restaurants

  1. #51

    Default

    Ensure closed fit, maximize adaptive directionality (perhaps separate program), try reducing noise reduction (perhaps noise reduction is interfering with directionality), make sure you're set to REM-verified NAL-NL2 targets so you're picking up adequate high frequency gain, try just one hearing aid (remote possibility of binaural interference), stay away from walls in front or behind, manage distance, clean directional mics. I performed in-clinic speech-in-noise testing with many top hearing aids last summer and found the mid-to-premium Demant hearing aids (Bernafon/Oticon) to be top performers for front-facing speech (up to 10 dbSNR improvement in clinic). No harm trying something different to give you a healthy point of reference. Apart from that, use a remote mic, change restaurants, or come to terms with the fact that no hearing aid can effectively overcome > 10dbSNL.

  2. #52

    Default

    All of this information was created by the manufacturer who has a vested interest in selling hearing aids. You would be wise to stop drinking the Kool-Aid. For what it's worth, here's a new study from Signia that shows Signia primax hearing aids are superior to Oticon Opn for speech understanding in background noise:

    https://www.signia-pro.com/scientifi...ibility-study/
    Rasmus_Braun,
    That's a very interesting article. I have been using Oticons Agile Pro (BTE) for 3 years, but switched to Signia Silk (CIC, Primax 7) four weeks ago. The universal no-custom-mould CIC is brilliant I think, but that's another story. Back to noise..I have not yet been able to test them in really noisy pubs, but I have used them on flights and in that setting I can tell you right now they are superior to the Oticons. It was easier now to talk to my wife with the noise cancelling/directonal program enabled. But of course, it can be that my Oticons are not optimized.
    And that's the clue here as many have stated in this very good thread. The audis only adjust according to the producers sw preferences. I read an article somewere of an electronic engineer who was fed up with countless visits to his audi so he did an in-depth research on how his HA operated and bought the necessary equipment to adjust them himself. He concluded after a lot of experimenting that the default programs leave a lot to be desired and that most HA users only uses a fraction of the HA's capability. He strongly encourage HA users to invest time and knowledge in this. But this is not for everyone of course..
    Last edited by Morton; 04-26-2017 at 03:02 AM.

  3. #53

    Default

    While I agree that the Oticon marketing department is aggressive and snake-y, that study from Signia was poorly designed--the listening conditions tested were biased in favour of traditional directional mics.

  4. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morton View Post
    Rasmus_Braun,
    That's a very interesting article. I have been using Oticons Agile Pro (BTE) for 3 years, but switched to Signia Silk (CIC, Primax 7) four weeks ago. The universal no-custom-mould CIC is brilliant I think, but that's another story. Back to noise..I have not yet been able to test them in really noisy pubs, but I have used them on flights and in that setting I can tell you right now they are superior to the Oticons. It was easier now to talk to my wife with the noise cancelling/directonal program enabled. But of course, it can be that my Oticons are not optimized.
    And that's the clue here as many have stated in this very good thread. The audis only adjust according to the producers sw preferences. I read an article somewere of an electronic engineer who was fed up with countless visits to his audi so he did an in-depth research on how his HA operated and bought the necessary equipment to adjust them himself. He concluded after a lot of experimenting that the default programs leave a lot to be desired and that most HA users only uses a fraction of the HA's capability. He strongly encourage HA users to invest time and knowledge in this. But this is not for everyone of course..
    Hi Morton, I also want to clarify that the Signia article Rasmus_Braun was referring to was about Signia's Narrow Directionality and Adaptive Directionality vs Omni directionality. They did take a stab at a Competitor A whom they didn't name but it was obvious that it was the Oticon OPN, with its "open" paradigm being synonymous with the omni directionality. But it's not about Signia vs Oticon in general. It's about directional beam forming vs omni with brain hearing.

    The reason I want to clarify this is because the Oticon Agile Pro that you have does not subscribe to the OPN's "open" paradigm. The Agile Pro's noise reduction is very much designed in the traditional beam forming directional fashion just like the Signia's approach. Well, maybe I shouldn't say "just like" because Signia claims some special approach like "narrow" and "adaptive", but I guess close enough.

    Anyway, my point is that your confirming that the new Signia Silk you have is superior in noise reduction to your old Oticon Agile Pro (at least on the plane so far) is not really validating the results of the Signia article. You've only confirmed that the Signia's beam forming directionality works better than the Agile Pro's beam forming directionality.
    HA wearer since the 1990's > Rexton Insite+ CIC (2011-2016) > Oticon OPN RITE (2016)

    KHz 0.25...0.5...0.75...1.0...1.5...2.0...3.0...4.0... 6.0...8.0

    Left ...10...10....10.....30.....70....75....80....95.. ..90....80
    Right .25...30....40.....55.....75....85....90....90...1 00...100

  5. #55

    Default

    Hi Volusiano,
    Yes it'easy to mix apples and bananas when discussing HAs You are right about what you say of course. And I know the Signia test was just done with different directionality setups using the "universal" HA program.
    But my experience was with the noise programs enabled and I noticed among other things that the background cabin noise was more supressed with the Signia. Communication was easier. Whether this is due to the noise cancelling algorithm or the directionality function or both I have no idea. According to my audiologist the Signia is also the only HA which can transmit the actual audio signal between the left/right devices. If this is true it gives maybe some interesting solutions?

    I am actually on the waiting list for a trial of the OPN RITE. (Health Dept. pays for a HA set every 6 years). The Signias was bought privately as a CIC alternative to my RITEs. It will be interesting to compare.
    Last edited by Morton; 04-27-2017 at 03:15 AM.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    3,456

    Default

    Daft question but how can a single mic CIC have a directional function? The pinna effect is present, but that's it.

    Whether the Oticon is 'better' than the other Signia aids (the link to the survey seems to have been pulled) is hugely subjective and based on your measurement criteria.

    Problem is with all wearers, that it becomes virtually impossible to resolve the confirmation bias vs. outright performance as you become acclimatised to the settings.
    'He who is not courageous enough to take risks will accomplish nothing in life.'
    Link to my entry in the Hidden Content section.
    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content - Maintenance Stuff
    Hidden Content Hidden Content
    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content Hidden Content

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Central California
    Posts
    436

    Default

    I'm just hypothesizing, but if the CICs communicate wirelessly, couldn't the two individual mikes help determine directionality?

    Quote Originally Posted by Um bongo View Post
    Daft question but how can a single mic CIC have a directional function? The pinna effect is present, but that's it.

    Whether the Oticon is 'better' than the other Signia aids (the link to the survey seems to have been pulled) is hugely subjective and based on your measurement criteria.

    Problem is with all wearers, that it becomes virtually impossible to resolve the confirmation bias vs. outright performance as you become acclimatised to the settings.
    .25 .5 1 1.5 2 3.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

    15 15 20 30 30 55 75 90 NR ​KS7
    10 10 20 15 25 35 65 85 95 WRS 100/92@45/40

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    3,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MDB View Post
    I'm just hypothesizing, but if the CICs communicate wirelessly, couldn't the two individual mikes help determine directionality?
    I don't think they are array beamforming. Their 'spatial configurator' (About 2/3s of the way down on this link- https://www.signia-pro.com/silk-primax/) specifies the conditions for beamforming, which seems to be way more than you get in a normal CIC.
    'He who is not courageous enough to take risks will accomplish nothing in life.'
    Link to my entry in the Hidden Content section.
    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content - Maintenance Stuff
    Hidden Content Hidden Content
    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content Hidden Content

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morton View Post
    According to my audiologist the Signia is also the only HA which can transmit the actual audio signal between the left/right devices. If this is true it gives maybe some interesting solutions?
    I know the OPN claims binaural communication between the left and right HAs using NFMI (Near Field Magnetic Induction). I've always wondered whether this is just sharing program/volume commands between the left and right HAs, or whether this includes sharing actual audio data between the two sides as well. Can any of our experts share their knowledge on what "binaural" communication means exactly?
    Last edited by Volusiano; 04-27-2017 at 09:01 AM.
    HA wearer since the 1990's > Rexton Insite+ CIC (2011-2016) > Oticon OPN RITE (2016)

    KHz 0.25...0.5...0.75...1.0...1.5...2.0...3.0...4.0... 6.0...8.0

    Left ...10...10....10.....30.....70....75....80....95.. ..90....80
    Right .25...30....40.....55.....75....85....90....90...1 00...100

  10. #60

    Default

    That is interesting about the Signia possibly being the only HA that transmits actual audio signal between the left/right devices. Hope someone else can chime in on that, too.

    I find that my old Agil Pro ITC aids do a better job in the noise program than my new Oticon Opn aids. I have a directional mic set for noisy places on both sets of aids, but I find that the old Agil Pro aids really dampen down the ambient noise to enable better speech discrimination for me. Oh well!
    =================

    Quote Originally Posted by Morton View Post
    Hi Volusiano,
    Yes it'easy to mix apples and bananas when discussing HAs You are right about what you say of course. And I know the Signia test was just done with different directionality setups using the "universal" HA program.
    But my experience was with the noise programs enabled and I noticed among other things that the background cabin noise was more supressed with the Signia. Communication was easier. Whether this is due to the noise cancelling algorithm or the directionality function or both I have no idea. According to my audiologist the Signia is also the only HA which can transmit the actual audio signal between the left/right devices. If this is true it gives maybe some interesting solutions?

    I am actually on the waiting list for a trial of the OPN RITE. (Health Dept. pays for a HA set every 6 years). The Signias was bought privately as a CIC alternative to my RITEs. It will be interesting to compare.
    HAs from 1985>Starkey>Phonak>AGX>Oticon Agil Pro ITE>Oticon Opn miniRITE

    KHz 0.25...0.5...1.0...2.0...3.0...4.0....6.0...8.0

    Left ..65....80....80....65.....65....60....65....90
    Right 65....80....80....75.....75....70....65....90

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •