ADRO vid with WDRC comparison

I read a thread (only I’ve read so many, that I now can’t seem to find it)… people were talking about ADRO with their aids - I’m thinking they have the self-programable ones? … and someone said that all the other aids use WDRC, so why did this person like the adro (or it was a question along those lines)…

I was wondering if anyone who understands how aids work could comment on the vid. Has it been super-simplified for a layperson, or is it a fair description? Just seems that looking at that video ADRO seems Ok, but then obviously to sell their technology they will downplay the other… so like that other poster (which I can’t find), I am also curious as to why the main aids use the WDRC. I’m assuming that in the long run it is better?

And I just want to say that I saw the video on a hearing aid site, but it looked like a you tube video, so I was able to right click and select ‘watch on youtube’. It says the video is unlisted, so I hope the link works. (I was worried you would think I was spamming, that’s why I tried to take the link away from the hearing aid site. The video doesn’t talk about any hearing aids, just about ADRO with a quick comparison to WDRC, so wanted anyone thoughts on it - no spamming intended).

I’ll stop typing now.

Adro was essentially the fore-runner of the floating point linearity used in the Oticon Agil.

Essentially it picks a portion of the dynamic range (loudness) and amplifies just that into the audibility of the wearer across the whole spectrum. The difference between this and compression is that loudness growth is distorted, but you don’t get compression artefacts.

Whether you are happy with it or not is entirely another argument: I know it was licenced to Intrason in France before they went bust and it appeared on some of the Interton range too before they were bought out by GN.

There’s a couple of schools of thought on it. Some senior people in the industry (Dillon etc.) argue that as long as sounds are audible to you, the actual loudness level isn’t that critical (WDRC). The Adro school would argue the opposite: that you need to be able to differentiate loudness of the particular selected range you are listening to.

I think the answer is somewhere between the two: loudness appreciation ought to be possible by making the aid a little less compressed than is normal, but still audible in the residual dynamic range: which I think is where the Agil sits with the Floating Point Linearity mechanism they use.

America Hears uses Adro and are self-programmable if you buy them directly from America Hears via the web. Sams Club sells a version of America Hears aids that are not self-programmable. America Hears website is . I think America Hears is a great company to work with. My mom has owned their aids for over 5 years and I do the programming.

Below is Adro info from DynamicHearing in Australia. They own the trademark for Adro.

Hey thanks for your thoughts, and simplified explanation of it to WDRC, and the floating point lintearity. I find all this stuff pretty interesting, even if I don’t really comprehend much of it. I had my hearing test today, and the audiologist wrote a few brands and models down for me to consider, one of them being Oticon Acto and Oticon Agil Pro CIC.

Yes Adro is also used in the Australia Hears aids, (which is where I found that you tube video). My hearing loss isn’t suited to open style type aids, but I’m starting to wish it was. Some of the prices I was quoted today for aids, just make me wanna cry

Then buy over the web with America Hears. You get 60 day risk-free trial. You don’t have to program your own aids with America Hears. It’s just an option. They will program them for you via the web based on your description of the problem. Or if Sams is near you, see if they have a hearing aid specialist and department. If so they sell America aids. You just can’t program them yourself. I can tell you from my experience with my mom’s aids, having programming capabilities and factory adjustment capabilities via the web saves a lot of time. Going to the audiologist every week for at least 6 weeks for aid adjustments got old fast. Their hours are 9 to 5 so you have to get off work to go to the audiologist, just like a doctor’s appointment.

ADRO is fine for mild/moderate losses, but those with severe/profound with the usual accompanying recruitment will find the slow acting ADRO gain painful. WDRC aids control the gain much faster but the trade off is somewhat more distortion products. Ed

I am a fan of the ADRO technology. It allows the user with programming to have so much control over the details. The programming package allows an end user to use almost the same programming tools in terms of software that any audiologist or fitter would use. America Hears aids are also 32 channels, no compression, and it allows you to differentiate between high and low sounds. Its more natural.

With the programs they allow you to customize, you can make some really significant situational programs for any environment.

Prices are the best on the internet too. Just my opinion. Really enjoy the insight I got from this post.

Lack of compression is a feature?? Intelligent use of compression is a main feature if higher end aids, permitting less recruitment and better speech comprehension in noisy real world environments. Modern feedback control is also a form of compression that characterizes modern digital hearing aids.

the 64 channel ADRO aids that are sold at use feedback suppression mechanisms and sudden impulse protection things.

I would like to learn more about the wide dynamic higher end aids. Do you have any reference materials?

Studies done using various numbers of channels without changing anything else have indicated very little benefit above 4 - 6 channels. The main reason today to use the aids that have more channels is due to the other advanced features that the manufacturers only bundles with the higher channel aids.

I trialed Hearsource aids that had feedback suppression too. In fact, one aid was shipped with it turned off. The feedback suppression helped a little, but not nearly as much as the Starkey manufactured aids I now wear.

Guess what? The “sudden impulse protection things” use compression.

I assume you mean Widex brand aids. I have not researched them in depth since getting my Widex aids 8 years ago. I wanted a different hearing professional and the ones I tried recently did not sell Widex,

Here is some hopefully helpful information I found online. Usually the manufacturer’s main website is geared toward marketing to users and has very little useful information. Widex’s main site is here. You can usually find more useful information from a manufacturer’s professional site if it is not password protected. Widex’s professional site is here.

When I tried self-programming aids last year, I tried Hearsource instead of America Hears because I had found postings of people pleased with Hearsource support & service and other postings detailing issues getting basic help & support from America Hears. That was probably old information and company philosophies can change. I was not impressed with Hearsource’s lack of attentionto detail. My aids were not programmed in the manner promised, and they even forgot to turn on needed feedback suppression on one aid. I could not program the aids to give me good benefit without feedback issues, so I returned the aids.

Hopefully this information helps. I just could not see how lack of compression was not a liability considering today’s advanced technology. Apparently America Hears uses compression too.

ADRO is really a type of compression in and of itself, but not in the conventional sense of setting a gain at a given level of input SPL.

The gain slew rate is programmable as in other instruments (attack and release rates).