I was wondering if anybody has had any experience with the different fitting formulas available for the Widex Moment
I have a pair of the Widex Moment 440 HAs, programmed with the standard Widex programming which I am reasonably happy with - but I am wondering if it can be improved?
Has anybody been able to compare with, for example, the Moments programmed with the NAL/NAL2 fitting formula?
You could try all the different formula available yourself if you wanted to, have you considered DIY, all you need is compass software and the Noahlink wireless, the reason for doing DIY on your question, is only you’ll know which one you’ll like over any other, it’s not really possible to know any other way.
@tenkan Thanks for your suggestion, but at present anyway, I will decline as I am not convinced I have the ability to do this.
I have a set of Moment 330 HAs, and mild to moderate hearing loss (Apologies, I have not uploaded my audiogram).
When my audiologist programmed my HAs she did not follow the stanard Widex procedure as she said it often did not yield the best results for her clients. She has since sold her business to a large firm who run a chain of audiology clinics so I can’t contact her to find out what formula she used, sorry.
I thought it might be useful to you to know that at times the standard Widex fitting procedure does not yield the best results for a user.
Sure no worries, any time you change your mind just reach out to the community.
Do you have any feedback on what you would like to improve? It’s always a good idea to check you have been set up according to the fitting software as it works together to give the best aligned start point. Some fitters can carry forwards habits from previous models or may miss out a key step. The Widex algorithm, hearing aid type, tip, vent size and feedback calibration now work together seamlessly (in my experience) to mean that where slight adaptations that may have been needed previously are no longer required. For instance I used to need more body & it would take several attempts to get this right, but this has now been adjusted so that I don’t need any amendments to the prescription. It’s been pretty liberating for me to walk out in one fitting with hearing that would previously have taken several months of work. The right fit is very important, and even selecting a vent size .5 out will affect your results (one dispenser hadn’t selected it and didn’t realise the impact as he usually fitted another brand). If you have concerns & the fitter can’t address them, you could ask them to contact the technical support team for advice.
To reply to @tinkyp .
I was finding that some loud noises, like removing a plate from a stack of plates or closing a cupboard door, were just too loud.
I had already had the hearing level reduced from my theoretical maximum by 1 click, and we had reduced the MPO which should have truncated very loud noises - with the emphasis on should.
I had the Comfort program installed and found it was not the complete answer, although it might be my answer for restaurants? It seemed to concentrate on the louder noises and reduce the rest, but did not reduce the top end of the louder noises.
This was using the standard Widex program, and their sensogram.
I visited my audiologist this morning and we re-programmed the HA’s with the NAL/NAL 2 profile instead, again verified with their sensogram. This on the Widex software program.
It is early days yet but this may have solved my problems.
The MPO and the potential maximum volume have not been reduced (they were reset whenever we changed the program profile)
Removing a plate from a stack of plates still sounds loud, but no longer sounds as if you had dropped the whole stack from ceiling height. And voices in a room without soft furnishings no longer provoke the urge to turn the volume down.
In short, if anybody else is suffering from my original complaint, I think that reprogramming it to NAL/NAL2 standards is worth a try. Part of the reason for wanting to try this was due to finding out that the NHS (National Health Service in UK) use the NAL/NAL2 standard and I didn’t have the “overload” problem with my NHS aids
I am glad you are making progress & I found that plate noises were loud with domes but not with customs. We all have a different start point and it can be easier to follow through from settings you are familiar with. Keep going until you are happy although it can take time to get used to new sounds & technology. Once I had the set up best for me-customs with a vent & standard Widex set up it was just right. It can be difficult to keep going back to a fitter but it’s nothing personal-sometimes if it gets complicated a fresh set up and dispenser guidance from the manufacturer can be advisable to ensure all is as it should be for best performance.
older thread Tenkan, but a question for you. Is this as simple as going into Compass, changing the fitting formula, and exiting/saving? OR, would we have to re do sensogram (in situ hearing thresholds) and feedback tests etc, all other things (domes etc) being the same.
I do not know about widex software, but I DIY phonak P90 with Target software, and yes it is ONE click and save to change the fitting formula, I have switch back and forth several times and always go back to the Phonak formula.
thanks - is the change immediately noticeable? I thought perhaps the formula might also change the in situ base upon which the gains/thresholds at frequencies were set, meaning the house now sits on a new foundation of sorts.
You should “recalculate” if you change the fitting formula, feedback and sensogram, as there can be a difference even if you may not notice.
Ok, thanks, so for clarity - IF I re-do the formula, I should also THEN re do the in-situ, and the feedback test. In a sense it’s a brand new fitting…correct?
You can do a “new fitting” if you want, actually don’t have to do in-situ, sensogram (your audiogram can stay) with changes to the acoustics or formula you need
to do feedback test.
You can make up a couple of different clients with different formula if you wanted, this way you can experiment with fine tuning between them.
With Phonak Target if you make any change that requires a new feedback test it will prompt you to do so.
Widex may be the same.
Sorry - still confused…so I could go into any existing file/session, change to a new formula, do a new feedback test, but keep the original in-situ in place…
Yes you can do that, by sessions or just start a new client, sessions can get confusing so just be sure you take a lot of notes about what changes you’ve done.
Shouldn’t the software keep each time entered into the program a record that can be gone back to if needed?
I think if I do new session, there’s no in-situ in place like there is opening an existing session, at least in widex. I’d have to re-do the in-situ, and my hatred/anxiety of hearing tests would make that tough. Although I could write down (or screen shot) what the in-situ gain at all 15 frequencies are now, and just re-enter them…hmmm. And yes, i can always go back, but agreed - no one should do more than a few tweaks per session, or one gets lost in what changed and what’s “better.”
Yes it does, but it just doesn’t say or show any changes you’ve made, you do get an option to take notes, but if you make lots of changes you’d need to go old school pen and paper, I just find it easier to have a different client to experiment with.