Difference between "Sound Recover" and "Sound Recover II"


#21

It has been a few days now. The aids are still in factory warranty until 2020. I don’t know if the warranty is even transferable. Anyway, they have standard receivers, short wires, and power domes. I might switch to open domes. Occlusion doesn’t seem any worse with the power domes. Somehow, I thought that it would. The programming for these seems a good bit different to the V90s. I started a whole new profile for these and used “Audiogram Direct” instead of entering my old audiogram . That is a strange program. It won’t let me test below 250 Hz, and it won’t let me adjust the level high enough in the higher frequencies to hear because they are outside the fitting range of the aids. That given, I used the resultant curve and after trying the various fitting formulas, settled on Phonak Digital. I might play with that some more. I find “Sound Recover 2” a good bit different to the older version. I could tell that the older version was on and working. With SR2, I can’t really tell if it is doing anything or not. At first, I thought these Belong aids were doing a better job than the Venture aids. But, after a few days, they have become annoying just like the Venture aids. I can’t really tell, so far, if they are actually helping my issue of speech intelligibility. The clock on the wall ticks awfully loud now. I am going to go one more day before I make changes to the programming. I have decided that my hearing isn’t as bad as the audiogram would have me believe and by using it at first, I was using way more gain than I needed. I also am not doing anything above 4 kHz. Nothing is going to get that back, so I am just going to forget about it and concentrate on the highest frequencies where I have some hearing left. I’ll be back in a few more days with another post about how things are coming.


#22

Does the programming software have in-situ audiometry included? If so, you can run it to get a more accurate test of your hearing loss specific to how the hearing aids you’re wearing are amplifying the sound for you. Then represcribe the hearing aid to the in-situ result for more accurate amplification.


#23

I believe that’s what audiogram direct is.


#24

Yes, it sends tones through the aids and otherwise works a lot like a conventional audiogram. You have a choice whether to enter audiogram data, or use the Audiogram Direct data. Which is what I did. Like I said, it has some pecularities. They do say to do it in a quiet setting. Mine wasn’t all that quiet, but I think I got good results. It seems like it can also measure the level at which things become uncomfortable. I wasn’t able to do that because the aids couldn’t put out enough sound. I was interested in that because loud noises seem to bother me a lot more than they did. I read somewhere that people with high frequency loss have a much reduced dynamic range. I can believe that.


#25

You could probably create kind of a mixed audiogram using info from Audiogram Direct and your official audiogram (highs that Audiogram Direct won’t go high enough for) and make guesses at UCL if your audiogram didn’t include that. Ideally you wouldn’t notice Sound Recover 2 except for being able to detect higher frequency sounds, but without the distortion that Sound Recover would create. To me it sounds promising, but will likely involve a lot of trial and error.


#26

I don’t know about your programming software, but Genie 2 for the OPN which I wear seems to be able to combine the official audiogram and the in-situ audiogram. So the UCL values in my official audiogram still do get used (Genie 2’s in-situ audiometry doesn’t have UCL measurement capability anyway). For example, if I only use the in-situ to measure one side only, then it can represcribe for that one side and continue to use the official audiogram for the other side.