Technically with compression the sound waves are being “moved”. but that’s not an accurate description of what is happening. the circuit is just taking the frequency above a threshold and dividing the frequency by a number. But the problem with this approach is that at worst you could be creating a beeping machine. once a sound goes over a certain frequency the aid will just produce a beep. you can not interpret a beep to actual words. This is probably not how the aid performs and is just an extreme example to illustrate how compression can hurt discrimination.
whether audeo yes can apply frequency compression to the lower frequencies I do not know. can somebody with a copy of ipfg check the audeo yes or nadia settings and see if sound recover allows you to compress frequencies “below” a threshold? I believe it’s probably biased to just compress “above” a threshold.
first off, phonak made a name for themselves with their directional microphone technology a long time ago. and directional microphones is, I believe, is the only technology that has been proven to improve speech discrimination in noise.
phonak is also known for having 20 compression channels in their top of the line aids. which is far far more than all other manufacturers. and the audeo yes is a rite aid. both of these technologies do not really help with speech in noise but will go a long way in making the sounds sound good.
But before people start praising phonak for this. the directional microphone technology been around for over a decade and phonak been selling 20 channel aids for I believe the last 5 years.
I am glad you’ve found a good pair of aids. I actually agree that the audeo yes IX is the aid to beat. even over the exelia. but the sound recover technology has little to do with my support for the aid. I honestly don’t believe this technology is really helping anybody significantly.
So we got to keep things into perspective. really understand why some audi’s are prescribing certain aids and not the other. and figure out what really helps and what’s just seems to help but really does nothing at all. It makes us more informed consumers.
potentially true “frequency transposition” can revolutionize hearing aids just like directional mics did if it’s implemented well. phonak’s implementation of “frequency compression” indirectly gives credibility to “frequency transposition” as the compression technology is a poor man’s version of the transposition technology. I bet transposition requires too much processing power to implement. if we keep writing about it and critiquing it, it would give them an incentive to pour in the big bucks to push for the next big milestone in the phonak product line. enough with the bluetooth/open/rite sugar coating crap we need technologies that will actually help with speech discrimination.