Just logged onto the Phonak website and noticed something strange

I haven’t logged onto the Phonak website for probably at least a year - it didn’t help me that I could tell so I just quite logging on - also it was sometimes confusing to use and specifically didn’t help me with my Roger Select - it was less than helpful.

Any I just logged on after a considerable absence.

In another one or two comments I made here on the forums, but I don’t remember which ones, I made a statement that I had specified when I bought my Audeo Marvels - I had specified that I didn’t want the lowest level but the next upward/better. But then I noticed my audiologist who last programmed my current hearing aids has listed them as being Audeo 30. Its been awhile since I bought them but seeing that they are listed as Audeo 30 I was surprised on the Phonak website where I entered serial numbers etc. years ago, that the site says I have two M50 AUDEO MARVELs.

This is conflicting information not sure why - but it conflicts with my memory as specifying I wanted to purchase one level above the bottom level available which would have been M50. And that’s what the Phonak site says.

So I can’t remember where other than my current audiologist I got the idea I have M30 - that’s what my audiologist told me just yesterday. So I’m wondering how this happened. Which is right and why would they record on Phonak one thing and conflicting information from other sources.

How did my audiologist record M30? Do they have some way of pulling up that information during programing. How can I find out if that’s how they read out today - as 50 or 30. Maybe the hearing aids I have somehow lost their settings?

I really don’t want to contact my audiologist today as she was about as fed up with me as I was yesterday bombarding her with questions probably interfering with other stuff on her agenda.

Any ideas or information about the conflicts and is there something I can do now on my own at home to find out how they register now?

I probably shouldn’t have started this discussion today but waited until tomorrow as my TASK/ASSIGNMENT FOR THE DAY is to DECIDE which hearing aids I want my audiologist to order for me.

I hope that makes sense.

1 Like

You mean the target software, you can check with serial number there.

Serial numbers are always correct, your audiologist was mistaken.

Yes the exact model is listed when connected to the software.

The myPhonak app will show the models you have.
And no the settings won’t change the model (of course trial HAs can be in some cases,but not what you have now)

So just connect to the app and you’ll see the model.


If your model is not the same as what your audi tells you, follow the directions by tenkan here. See if you can get a “screen capture” of the model after you enter serial number. Then give your audi a call and share that info with them so your records are updated.

I had a similar occurance years ago where the sales receipt from my audi had one model of Oticon listed on it, but it was actually the top-of-the-line model I got. I just brought it to my audi’s attention so they could update their records.


I kind of agree with Bluejay. What’s your main concern since you seem to have annoyed the hell out of your audiologist

1 Like

I think you just have a case of faulty memory. It happens to the best of us :slight_smile:


I have not annoyed the hell out of my audiologist and she will be compensated for her time.

You are rude and not trying to be helpful.

Thanks for the advice and sharing your experience.

It’s amazing how things can get so mixed up. Is it because of our modern technology or in spite of modern technology.

Either way - thank you very much for sharing your problem and suggestions for a remedy.

Thanks, that sounds like reasonable advice and recommendations how to solve the problem. You’ve been very helpful.

While I interpretted this as you expressing a self-conscious degree of concern for taking up your audiologist’s time even though she probably didn’t express frustration, hass probably just took you at face value when you said “she was fed up with me”. I doubt he intended to be rude.


@kcsummerkc: FWIW, I interpreted your comment in the same vein as did @hass5744 . (Thanks for being stout, @Neville !)


Whatever I interpret your response as nothing constructive.

1 Like

@kcsummerkc: Don’t accuse other contributors to the forum as being rude when you are as acerbic as them.


@kcsummerkc perhaps you miscommunicated. I interpreted you post the same as @SpudGunner and the others.


@prodigyplace: Thank you. (I think unnecessarily “prickly” reactions need to be “beaten back”, like a grass fire … it gets out of hand so fast. YMMV, of course.)


You are welcome. Just speaking the truth.

I am only a Demantic Oticonian Moron. LOL


@prodigyplace: I learn a lot about other makes when Phonakites, Resondigans, and the other tribes get together for their pow-wows. (I don’t think that I’ll ever choose Phonak because I think I will dislike AutoSense for example.)

1 Like

Someone mentioned that Phonak automatically rebooting is considered normal. I also followed some of their daily duration woes threads.

I definitely steered away from Rexton and cousins due to their horrible firmware support and guidance with my current aids. When moving from their connect clip back to the phone their suggestion was toggling Bluetooth or rebooting the aids. I heard that on speaker phone directly.

1 Like

@prodigyplace: Yeah … my observation is simply that an Oticonian logging onto the Phonak we site is not so strange, after all: Ikve learned a lot about the pros and cons of my Oticons by following @Zebras dialogues with various members about her Phonaks.

1 Like

That you to everyone who came to my defense…I at no time intended to be rude. But when someone who does something for a living no longer wants to deal with a particular client it might be time to step back and maybe reevaluate exactly what you are trying to accomplish and how you’re going about it. Again thank you for everyone’s support. Sometimes I may be a little bit too direct.


@hass5744: As you are well aware, hass, I like direct - and it can be overlooked in your case, because you are intelligent, and your observations are usually incisive and helpful. (Or should I have said "helpful and incisive?)