Interesting I thought at first the better long distance “reception” was related to one of the advanced BT5 features, but I checked and ASHA does not use the “Coded” feature which doubles the transmission distance. It does the use the feature that doubles the bandwidth of LE transmissions.
So, no clue what might be going on.
I’ve also never checked reception from that further spot before so maybe I’m just lucky and have found a way to bounce the signal the extra distance. More careful investigation is needed! It also seems that I might need to connect to my HA’s through the Smart 3D app for Smart (un)Lock to work reliably. But once it’s “primed,” it works great and turning off the HA’s makes automatic unlocking go away. More research needed there to figure out why it doesn’t always work if I just turn on BT on the phone and have the HA’s on.
It does seem like I’m getting extra communication distance between phone and HA’s after getting both HA’s upgraded to the .4300 version of the Quattro firmware. From another ~40 ft away location through an interior sheetrock wall or two, both HA’s connect with the phone as shown by the Find My Phone applet under My ReSound that meters the BT signal strength of each HA to the phone. Both HA’s register at least a 5 to 10 mm signal above zero. The funny thing, too, is that they unlock my phone via Smart (un)Lock from that distance, too! It would be nice if ReSound required quite a bit more proximity for the HA BT signal to unlock one’s phone. Have no idea what’s going on with apparent improved BT communication distance and reliability but I’m happy to live with the results!
Perhaps the explanation of my apparent increased connectivity range (and faster connection) is that according to the ReSound compatibility page, ReSound’s version of ASHA requires Android 10 and BT 5.0. https://www.resound.com/en/help/compatibility (see very bottom of page)
BT 5.0 is faster and has longer range than BT 4.2. The Samsung Galaxy Note 8, although it’s not currently destined to get Android 10, supports BT 5.0. So if my Quattro’s and my Note 8 are now communicating via BT 5.0 vs. BT 4.2 before the .4300 Quattro firmware update, that would explain my tentative casual observations about connectivity. bluetooth 5.0 vs 4.2-Difference between bluetooth 5.0 and 4.2
That was my initial thought, but your Galaxy Note 8 doesn’t (at least didn’t) support the long range feature of BT LE. The article I’ve cited a couple of times has a link that lets you check your phone for the optional BT 5 features.
Yeah, I see that I actually read your OP in another thread and gave you a Thumbs Up! but since that was over 19 days ago and you didn’t bring it up in this thread, I forgot and didn’t make the connection.
I downloaded the Nordic Semiconductor nRF Connect for Mobile app from Google Play that scans for and reveals characteristics of BLE devices. It also has a DEVICE information page for the host device (my Galaxy Note 8). Sure enough, it says that my Galaxy Note 8, now running Android Pie, does not support PHY Coded (longer range) but it does support PHY 2M (higher speed). Interestingly, the nRF app says that the Quattro’s at a hardware level are Bluetooth Core 4.1 devices.
I wonder if the nRF app could just be reading the BT MAC addresses and looking stuff up in a database and not actually querying device characteristics by protocol and perhaps missing any effect of subsequent firmware or software updates to a device?? - probably an answer in nRF app specifications but am too lazy to look it up just right now… (later) - seems like from watching developer video on Google Play that service characteristics are determined by discovery, not database lookup! Cool!
Since my Quattro’s have been presumably been upgraded to be BT 5.0 capable by a firmware update, it’s not clear what’s changed but as cited in the XDA article that you reference in your post Bluetooth 5 features, the only mandatory BT 5.0 feature is PHY 1M, which is also in BT 4.2. PHY 2M is just a recommendation, not a requirement, in the ASHA standard, so when ReSound is saying BT 5.0 is required for their implementation of ASHA, it’s a mystery as to what really is absolutely required for ASHA relative to BLE standards…
“It is strongly recommended that the central and peripheral support 2MB PHY as specified in the BT 5.0 specification.” (maybe ReSound is making PHY 2M effectively a requirement, not optional?! - quote is from 1st para after the System Requirement list for ASHA: Hearing Aid Audio Support Using Bluetooth LE
Just for laughs, I think I’ll go outdoors and test transmission range with a clear line of sight. Indoors with the possibility of reflections and variable barriers across walls is an iffy testing proposition.
Edit_Update: I had asked the ReSound Smart 3D app support folks about any changes in the 3D app or the firmware that might make the BLE connection between phone and HA’s more reliable or longer distance and just got the following terse (but helpful) e-mail reply:
Currently we are working on a solution, so we can get more and faster feedback from users of our apps.
Both the app update and the firmware update did contain some corrections which make the connection more stable. One of them are the pairing into Bluetooth settings, as you have noticed.
Maybe a (much) more stable connection just makes for a longer distance connection (better signal-to-noise ratio?).
You might be onto something with the idea that nRF is looking stuff up in a database. I know when I query my Nokia, it gives me a different version of the Android update than what actually exists on the phone. It’s Nokia phone specific, but nRF says I’m on version “i” and my phone actually says version “h”
I find the ASHA standards confusing regarding BT version confusing to. It starts out saying something about BT Core Specification Version 5 and then later says BT 4.2 is the minimum.
Then there’s the fact that the Pixel 2 is not supported and it has Android 10 and BT5.
I’d love a lay level explanation of why this is so complicated.
Bluetooth is a riddle wrapped up in an enigma wrapped up in a standards committee full of people with disparate goals and a strong spirit of non-cooperation.
2 Likes
Had the wife hold the phone with the ReSound Smart 3D app on its STATUS page - shows connectivity and relative battery charge of HA’s. Walked out into the backyard until wife said both HA’s were dropping in and out of connectivity. Got 77 feet into backyard (23.5 meters). Switched to using the nRF app RSSI graph, which shows signal strength (lower readings are weaker). The nRF app connectivity agreed with the Smart 3D (not surprising as both depend on the HA and phone antennas). The signal dropped out again at around 77 feet and was around -95 dBm when it did (-100 dBm is considered to be about the limit of connectivity and -20 dBM a VERY strong signal). Interestingly, when I am just a foot or two from my Quattro’s the signal strength never exceeds about -65 to -70 dBm. So I wonder if the HA’s are deliberately down-regulating the strength of their own output to conserve battery (I presume since you can control the HA’s from the phone app, that the HA’s could have an awareness of the strength of the phone BT signal and based on that, decide how strong their own output needs to be to maintain a decent connection).
So I wonder if the Quattro’s in the future will be able to accept direct streaming from other BT 5.0+ enabled devices without having to use my Phone Clip+ as an intermediate device? If the BT streaming is as good or better through ASHA as I’m seeing after the Quattro firmware and Smart 3D updates to just plain old BLE streaming, I should be able to walk around my house, leave my phone or other streaming device in one place, and hopefully still get decent streaming in just about every room of the house.
BTW, in playing around, I discovered my Google Home Mini also puts out BLE and just as for my Quattro’s, I can pick it up at pretty decent signal strength 35 to 40 feet away on my phone through one to two interior sheetrock walls. It also stays at a fairly low output, measuring between -50 to -60 dBm or so, even when I am right next to it. I guess a -20 dBm output would be much more signal strength than needed and at risk of causing RFI for the neighbors (or even other devices of my own), etc.
And that’s just the bluetooth part. Android is also complicated. Just because the hardware theoretically supports ASHA and the device has Android 10, does not mean the device supports ASHA. This is up to the vendor of the device.
1 Like
Now I’m wondering if Phonak, having put a lot of time and effort into BlueTooth Classic, will do anything with ASHA. Does Phonak’s hardware miniaturization effort, allowing for BlueTooth Classic to even be possible, give enough competition or will ASHA win the day? Your thoughts?
To steal a phrase: Predictions are really hard, especially about the future. I think it’s attributed to Yogi Berra, but I have no clue. If I had to bet, I think ASHA fades away in a few years, but as I said, i have no clue.
2 Likes
@TraderGary Phonak made a strategic decision to support bluetooth classic streaming rather than MFi. For non-iPhone users, this was a big deal. However, recall how supposedly difficult it was (initially) for them to support multi-pairing. According to what I was told by Phonak, this is because they had to push their technology to the limit to get bluetooth classic streaming to work. IMO, it’s a much bigger leap to support MFi and/or ASHA than it was to support pairing with two devices. Therefore, I speculate that it’s easier to support MFi and ASHA together, since they are so similar than it would be to support bluetooth classic and MFi and/or ASHA. Again, I’m speculating because I have no inside information. The only people that know if Phonak HAs can support ASHA and/or MFi is Phonak.
Having used Marvels and Opns and having an iPhone and an android phone, I really like MFi. I would much rather use MFi / ASHA than bluetooth classic, if I had the choice. My android will never support ASHA so unless I replace it, even when Oticon offers the firmware that supports ASHA, I won’t be able to use it. Since you are committed to Pixel phones, ASHA would be great, so I hope Phonak offers it.
1 Like
@MDB I think you have it backwards. Bluetooth classic is an old technology. While the Phonak HAs are great for people who don’t have phones that support MFi or ASHA, transmitting from one HA to the other because bluetooth classic only supports streaming to one device is a kludge which results in uneven battery consumption, as well, the connection between the two devices has to transmit through the wearer’s head. Not nearly as elegant as streaming directly to both HAs simultaneously. Bluetooth advancements are in low-energy. I would be really surprised if MFi and ASHA don’t take over the market and completely displace bluetooth classic. This won’t happen overnight, but it will happen.
Very Interesting! Thanks for your insight, darylm. I’ve always been disappointed at the end of the day to see my left ear with more than half battery left and my right ear close to depletion. Knowing what I know now, I will get disposable batteries next time. It’s going to be very interesting to see where we will be positioned next year. I may very well be upgrading my Marvels to something better! 
You may very well be right. My thinking is that Phonak is currently selling a lot of hearing aids. ASHA needs to overcome two problems. There’s only one hearing aid that currently supports it and 4 phones (soon to be 8) that make up a very small percent of market share. I think it’s really hard to overcome market share. Admittedly Marvels have their flaws, but most people seem pretty happy with them. ASHA may be better technology–so was Sony Betamax.
2 Likes
My understanding is that Oticon will be supporting it with a firmware update. MFi and ASHA are very similar, so would expect that any HA that supports MFi will also support ASHA. There is no doubt that the market share for ASHA will be much smaller than MFi or Marvels for the foreseeable future, due to how few phones support Android 10. It will grow bit by bit each year, but it will take a long time before it catches up to MFi. Phonak saw this gaping hole in the market and went for it. It will be interesting to see what their next move will be.
1 Like
It seems to me that Android Version 10 will be rapidly rolling out over the next few months in most newer phones, and if ASHA is built in, then phones are not going to be the weak link in the chain. However, I suspect it will take longer for the hearing aid companies to build it into their aids. It may be a hardware as well as a software upgrade.
I don’t follow the Android stuff much, and not iPhone either for that matter, but one thing I find strange with Android is that while it seems inevitable that version 10 will be coming with new or fairly new models of phones, it does not seem to be expected that it will be able to be updated on all that many older phones. That is going to be a bit of a drag on the acceptance of ASHA in the market if that is the case. This article at the link below gives some estimations as to when and to what models Android 10 is expected to be compatible with. I see that me wife’s less than a year old Moto G6 Play is not on the list.
On this and other posts, you have equated getting Android 10 as the same as being ASHA compatible. They are not. Android 10 is necessary for ASHA compatibility, but it is not sufficient. Pixel 2XL and 2 are examples.
That is unfortunate. Perhaps availability of ASHA is a long way from becoming mainstream then.