Thanks for your insights. I have only been on this forum a short time but I have quickly come to respects your views.
I did consider the Ambra. If you look hard enough Phonak puts out a comparison of the Ambra, Audeo, and Naida. The problem is the chart is wrong or misleading and does not highlight the differences between the three.
I had to call an audi to find out that the Ambra used just a tube and could not use a RIC.
What’s misleading: For the Ambra it shows “Push Button” (for VC or Prog selection), but not for the Audeo or Naida which leads one to believe the button can adjust both volume and memories simultaneously where as for the other two it could only do one or the other.)
for the Ambra is shows UltraZoom premium but for the other two, just UltraZoom but an audi told me they both have Ultrazoom premium also.
Same thing for SoundFlow. Ambra shows SoundFlow premium but the Naida is just SoundFlow and the Audeo doesn’t show SoundFlow at all but an audi told me they both have Premium.
The Ambra and Audeo have “Easy Programs” (whatever that is) but the Naidas do not. i think the Naida do also.
The Ambra has “datalogging+/self learning” but the Audeo and Naida only have “Datalogging+” (not self learning also).
The Audeo does not have "T-coil’ which I believe is accurate but since PhonaK chart lists most of the features in different order it is difficult to discern that without careful study.
The Naida shows “Water Resistant” whereas the other two do not, which is correct for the Audeo, but not the Ambra which does show “NEW microH2O” so I suppose someone could check and determine this meant water resistent, but this is at the top of the list whereas “Water Resistant” is buried in the middle of the Naida list.
Finally there are pictures but they do not appear to be to scale so one can get a sense of the size. I could not find the size info on Phonaks website. An audi called Phonak who told him the Naida S was a size 36, the Naida CRT was size 32 and the Audeo was 22. The picture on the chart makes the Audeo look the same size as the Naida CRT so it’s misleading.
Anyway back to the Ambra, the reason for the recommendation on the RIC was that I seem to be able to hear well enough at low frequencies so a RIC would better allow them to pass through my ear canal than whatever connects tot he end of a tube on an Ambra.
As for the Naida CRT versus Audeo: My hearing loss has become more noticeable over the past few years but I do not know if it has been basically the same or has deteriorated more rapidly and might continue to deteriorate. If it deteriorates significantly more, then the CRT power could be upped by replacing the receiver with a more powerful one whereas I might be out of fitting range with the Audeo.