Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Fitting Protocol -Mfg. Proprietary, NAL1, NAL2, DSL, wing it?

  1. #1

    Default Fitting Protocol -Mfg. Proprietary, NAL1, NAL2, DSL, wing it?

    I got my first hearing aids in Nov. 2016. Based on insurance availability I bought Oticon OPN1's with little tryout of others (Siemens Pure 7px for a week). I got a package thru TruHearing which my insurance would accept. It included 5? visits with an audiologist. Pay as you go afterwards. I also decided to become programming capable, so I also got Genie 2 software, MiniPro, and cables/strips.

    Have been using Genie2 with Oticon VAC+ fitting protocol because I assumed it was best and customized for the OPNs. My Audi is not real familiar with Oticon but is willing to work with me, knowing that I now have my own programming ability. My aids were programmed to the target provided by the VAC+ software but it did not seem I was hearing as well as I believed I could. My Audi ran a Real Ear Test recently and it showed 4K to 8k was considerably under amplified (even though it matched the VAC+ target), and suggested I start increasing a couple of clicks in the highs and evaluate. My problem is that after losing hearing, and getting used to it, it is not always easy knowing if you are hearing everything you could. For the first time, I explored a different fitting protocol that Oticon also offers (NL1 and NL2). Each of those fitting protocols indicated notably higher targets than the VAC+ fitting protocol. I am currently evaluating a couple of different NL2 based calibrations. Now getting close to feedback limit on left side with open dome, but feel overall hearing is much improved.

    i know even with the same audiogram, different people may prefer different calibrations, but I was curious how other self programmers (both new and old timers) prefer to calibrate. I know hearing well is the first priority, but I also like the idea of using objective measures to confirm or validate. Please share your approaches, as I obviously have much to learn.
    Freq. 250 500 1K 2K 3K 4K 6K 8K
    R 15 5 10 25 45 65 50 35
    L 10 5 10 35 60 65 75 65





    Oticon OPN1 w/85 Receivers and Open Domes since Nov. 2016

  2. #2

    Default

    Don't know if you've seen this thread that talks about different fitting rationales or not, but I thought it's an interesting read. Maybe you can search for more similar thread on the forum, or on google.

    http://www.hearingaidforums.com/show...2-or-DSL-v5-0a
    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

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Central California
    Posts
    517

    Default

    The thread that Volusiano shared is a good one and basically agrees with what I've researched online. In short, if one is looking for an easy to accept, more "natural" sounding fitting, go with the manufacturer's. If you want maximum ability to understand speech, go with NAL-2 and ideally get it verified with REM. Allow plenty of time to adjust and tweek as needed.
    .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

  4. #4

    Default

    Thanks for the comments and link. I had read that link which I think I found with Google. So far I like the NL2 targets and calibrations better. I plan to try to plug in the same gains/compression ratios from my NL2 calibration into a VAC+ program(if I can), since it appears Oticon may limit the use of some of their proprietary features when using NL2. If I still like the NL2 better I will just stay with it. I spent Jan. and Feb. playing with noise control instead of amplification only to decide that with my hearing and open domes, most of the offensive noise bypasses the aids. Now with more high freq. amplification my speech recognition seems better in quiet as well as noisy. I think with better amplification my "Brain Hearing" (as Oticon refers to it), is managing the speech in noise pretty well. I have pretty much decided that the VAC+ "targets" are to insure happy customers on first fittings, and then your Audi is supposed to "fine tune" a more appropriate long term calibration. Would still be interested in others experiences.
    Freq. 250 500 1K 2K 3K 4K 6K 8K
    R 15 5 10 25 45 65 50 35
    L 10 5 10 35 60 65 75 65





    Oticon OPN1 w/85 Receivers and Open Domes since Nov. 2016

  5. #5

    Default

    Oddly enough, my NL2 cals also sound "natural" after a few days. I know I got used to not hearing a lot of things which at first is annoyiing, but I like being able to hear them again. After a few days, my brain just starts ignoring most of the sounds I'm not interested in, but I know I'm still able to hear them. I think the Oticon " open hearing" concept seems less desirable (at least at first), if longer term hearing aid users have become used to very directional hearing patterns.
    Last edited by shellboy; 04-17-2017 at 07:33 AM.
    Freq. 250 500 1K 2K 3K 4K 6K 8K
    R 15 5 10 25 45 65 50 35
    L 10 5 10 35 60 65 75 65





    Oticon OPN1 w/85 Receivers and Open Domes since Nov. 2016

Posting Permissions

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