Both Phonak Sphere & Philips 9050

Hearing Aids
1

Hi, I am currently trialing both the Phonak Sphere and the Philips 9050 from Costco. I am DIY with both brands of fitting software and also had several audiograms and a recent REM at Costco.
If there is a similar comparative post… on these please let me know… I could not find the same thing.

I am going to be deep testing performance in a variety of situations.
Perhaps others are doing so as well.

Not only is intelligibility of speech in noise important to me but also music, direct streaming from computer and TV, Bluetooth connectivity, convenience, performance and range; and as I have voiced great frustration already in another thread - the actual phone app that controls various connections, equalizer and balance between streamed source or phone and hearing aid mic sounds.

The Philips I have fitted with custom molds on 105db speakers.
The Phonak are power domes with #3 speakers.

While I had gotten the Philips prior to the Phonaks, for the past month I have mostly been using the Phonak. Now I want to concentrate on the Philips.

I think the Philips software has some advantages.
And the Philips App has the advantage of EQ on Streamed sources.
But while the Philips App seems more stable and has just been updated to a version 2, the Phonak app has more options and detail while also having major annoyances and disconnects.

I welcome all comments and questions to make us all stronger better and wiser users.

4 Likes
2

Have you looked at any Dr. Cliff reviews? I think I’ve see him review Phonak Sphere vs Oticon -and Phillips is made by the same company. Also be sure you are comparing the most recent tech if you want apples to apples. Phillips may not be the most recent version. Costco often gets the newest version months later.

3 Likes
3

A few comments. Your audiogram would be helpful to make this a useful comparison.
Comparing hearing aids with custom molds to another with domes is not really a fair comparison.
Saying the Phonaks have #3 speakers (I assume you mean receivers) just tells us the length of their wire. It doesn’t tell us their strength. Thanks for making the effort to share a comparison.

1 Like
4

Thank you - yes, I had seen his videos and that one… months ago, when I was shopping and considering models to try.

My comparison right now is between the two that I have, and that I listed here. The Sphere 90 and the Philips 9050. Is the Philips identical to the Intent? I am reasonably confident that in all the significant aspects it is. Should anyone have specific credible evidence one way the other… PLEASE tell me! I have ample time to compare the Philips to another brand. But if I am returning the Phonak… I need to make that decision much sooner.

1 Like
5

Thank you for replying, I will be providing a lot of feedback shortly.
First to answer your questions…
Not sure why they are called receivers, when in fact they are wired speakers. I believe that dates back to the days of tubes piping the sounds into the years. But they really are all speakers. I can refer to them as receivers every now and then - sure. And will be providing audiogram info soon. Was looking for a way to automatically do that, but only found a field to enter the data manually… seems archaic.

The RECEIVERS that I have with the Phonak say 3P on them.
The software is set to Receiver P

The Philips 9050 are fitted with 105 Receivers in custom molds.

3 Likes
6

Some history -
I had ReSound Aids until five years ago.
Then Oticon Mini Rites for five years.
For the last 30 days I have been exclusively wearing the Phonak 90 Spheres with power domes on P receivers.

The Philips 9050 are fitted with 105 Receivers in custom molds.

Speech in noise is important, obviously, however other features are not less important. Streaming from both TV and Computer are vital.
I use the computer for sound critical creative work… so the sound quality as well as the ease to control and switch sources is important.

Today is the first day I am using the Philips all day.
Still have to make some critical tweaks in the software, to feel as good as the Phonaks had gotten. But already I am getting impressed with the Philips App.

The Phonak APP itself, has a crazy number of options to shape sound and response characteristics of the hearing aid programs, but when it comes to Streamed sound… there is just the EQ.
In practice, I am not sure how much more useful those many app options are, for one like myself who is using the fitting software. I can create a few programs that have the desired settings and avoid the tangle of App options that within Phonak’s app still need to be saved and so are limited in number of programs anyway.

The Philips has individual EQ for the Streamed source and for the environment. The Philips app does not have the confusing graphics.
I have already found an annoying anomaly in the Philips App :grimacing: which I will share - shortly.

I will be taking both sets of instruments into the field in a few days, after I have better tweaked the Philips.

Before I PERSONALLY tweaked the Phonak software, the sound was very metallic. I am not yet certain, but the Philips sound seems to be even more human.

Even though I had been playing with the Phonak software for a month, the Philips software seems richer, more detailed and more useful to a DIYer. I will try to compare them side by side and see if I can articulate some key factors I prefer.

2 Likes
7

Just wondering: Did you also tried to change the algoritm, this might do a great job. (DSL, NAL, Phonak Digital)

2 Likes
8

I don’t have a lot to contribute but I do have the 9050 and did trial the Phonak Sphere for three weeks over Christmas/New year.

The reasons I went with the Philips:

  1. It might seem strange, but the fitter at Costco had let me return two sets of aids previously and I would have felt bad returning a third. Maybe if the difference had been clear-cut I would have thought about it.
  2. As perceived by me, it wasn’t a night-and-day difference. The Phonaks sounded natural. I slightly preferred their sound at the time, but have since gone back to power domes from molds on the Philips and I think now that it was at least partly the power domes on the Phonaks that made me like their sound. The Philips now sound similar to that. Speech comprehension was roughly the same in most environments.
  3. The Spheric mode definitely worked but I didn’t spend enough time in noisy environments to give them a good test. There was no REM, no tweaking as you’d expect with trial aids. It’s possible that we left a lot of benefit on the table. I’m not completely comfortable with my decision, but…
  4. Price. I had to make a decision on what I experienced and I couldn’t justify the cost based on that. In AUDs it was $2000 vs $10000. I could probably have got the Phonaks for less, but with one year support only at somewhere like Specsavers, but it still have been a lot of money to me.
  5. The pricing difference meant some financial pain now but it would also have locked me in to the Phonaks for the next 5 years. I can’t help but think that hearing aids are on the cusp of major improvements. I wanted to be able to upgrade sooner rather than later.
6 Likes
9

I believe they might be called receivers from landline telephone days when the receiver was the part you held to your ear. Language is an agreement between communicators. You can call them speakers if you want and people will know what you mean. Hearing aid professionals will call them receivers though. Your Phonak receivers are “Power” receivers. They make a UP (Ultrapower) that would be similar to the Phillips 105 receivers. They would require custom molds though.

2 Likes
10

Yes - I certainly can relate to that. I actually found an online dealer that is great for the Phonaks, incredibly responsive, professional, reliable and quick! And his price for the Phonaks SET is only $1300 more. At that price, I want to be more objective.

1 Like
11

I remember that - holding the receiver to my ear… picking up the receiver. I guess that is how one would receive the call. Thanks for the blast from the past!

2 Likes
12

I had originally tried the Phonak algorithm. That was before my customization. You are right, I should try it again now, and will.
Is there a reason - based on my audiogram that you say this ?

1 Like
13

As a DIYer, I would down load a frequency analyzer phone app, and go to an AI voice generated web site to help dial in the hearing aids.

I use, Spectroid as my frequency analyzer, and Typecast’s AI voice generator web site.

I’ve been very pleased with my DIY results using those two programs with my Philips 9040 hearing aids with the Philips open domes. However, my low frequency hearing is better.

If one wanted, hearing aids that work well with old phones and the claim to fame hearing in noise utility of the Phonak Sphere, then for just an additional $1,300 go with the Phonak.

Note you currently give up LE Audio with Auracast with the Phonak Sphere, but they do say the hearing aid can be updated at a later time with a software upgrade providing they actually upgrade the software.

1 Like
14

Actualy no. It is my own experience in DIY. I suffered once with a similar observation myself in buying and comparing 2 different brands top of the line’s. Wondering paying that much for each of them and couldn’t believe the perceived difference which made me feel pain in my wallet that had to be resolved.

1 Like
15

Some extremely reliable companies promise Firmware upgrades and always deliver - like Nikon. Others have disappointed me in the past.
Phonak is an unkown to me, and if Auracast is not for sure - imminent. Then that alone must be a deciding factor.

As has been said - technology will continue to improve. So not sure how much I should be tempted by a small Sphere benefit that could quickly become old.

Thanks for reminding me about the Spectral analyzer. I had installed one, but failed to follow up. How does the AI voice factor in your adjustments. I can play loops output to computer speaker of actual problematic sources while tweaking in fitting software. Would that not be as effective ?

1 Like
16

The AI voice generator allows you to listen to a variety of different voices through your computer speakers, children, teenagers and adults.

Using your frequency analyzer on those AI generated voices, you can identify the frequencies where you experiencing issues. From there you can go into your programming software and adjust those frequencies that are giving you the most issues in real time.

I found it very helpful. However, my hearing and hearing setup is different from yours. So all I can say is try it.

1 Like
17

Update: Yesterday I went to a noisy diner swapping between brands frequently. It was mid afternoon, not fully packed but the radio was piping through speakers behind and to my side, while staff were intermittent vacuuming and rug shaking! Need to tweak Philips fitting more.

The Phonaks as others have said, were more potent, and have a dedicated speech in noise program, but isolated the peoples voices as has been described here, like they are in bubbles. The Philips did a fine job in that setting. I was easily able to hear my friend across the table. And in fact the Philips was an easier sound. Will be trying the systems in some small lecture and class settings. With the Phonaks, I would often hear very clear sentence fragments, while unsure where that person was!

Experimented with each brand’s custom fitting rationale - For me, The NAL-2 is the most comfortable and understandable in both brands.

I am anxious to try the Philips for my computer work - and will tomorrow after a USB adapter arrives. The Phonak works well with the computer, but as I said the Philips has EQ for both streaming and surroundings. While testing this seems really a benefit, but in actual practice, I wonder if it should be a deciding factor.

The Philips App has acted erratically at times. Often loosing connection with one or the other aid. This is the same issue I have long complained about with the Oticon app for my prior system. But this app has been improved in some ways.

Because I do a lot of work with power tools, I had set up a NOISE program in the Philips. It is an AMAZING benefit to me. With them I am able to use all my tools without having to don ear muffs. Much more convenient, safer, and all around great.

I created a NOISE program in the Phonak. That brand does not have a pre-named NOISE program, so will report how the custom program compares. Important to know that the NOISE program in Philips truly cuts down on the painful noise of all tools. Nail guns, staplers, impact wrenches and saws, as well as the ear muffs. BUT of course the aids are more comfortable, more accessible, and I can understand my assistant better with the aids than with just the muffs! I am sure to find this mode useful next July 4th! And at Weddings!

I am anxious to know if Phonak will really be updating their firmware soon with Auracast ? Is it a planned firmware upgrade, or merely Vaporware ?

I started this thread comparing the two aids, but will no doubt be sharing my DIY discoveries. While I have been able to tweak my Oticons for many years, I rarely did because I was going to the dealer. Finally I having grabbed control of my ears with my own two hands - even as my hearing has worsened I feel more in control.

The power domes on my Phonaks, seem like they are a tighter seal in my ears than the custom molds on my Philips. If I keep the Phonaks, I may have custom molds made for them. I recently learned that in ordering custom domes, some places chime in as to how deep they are built, while others leave it up to the manufacturer. But as I am concerned with keeping noise out and generated sound in, I wonder if I should request deeper molds? The clear acrylic of the custom mold is surely more comfortable, but feels looser. The power molds unless I oil them frequently keep itching me.
More to follow…

2 Likes
18

This is what I’ve been looking for thank you

19

I downloaded and peeked at a frequency analyzer app.
Maybe it is worth revisiting, but from past experience with waveforms of sound vs intelligibility - their are many many components to speech - all working together too quickly to parse the parts needing adjustment.
I find it more useful to play the actual movie or show through my computer speakers centered before me, as I tweak the fitting software.
However, possibly - a program on my system, like Adobe Audition, might be used as you suggest… to analyze the frequencies needing gain, or attenuation.

1 Like
20

Well all I can say is that it was helpful to me. I’m pretty satisfied with my results.

1 Like