I know it wasn’t.
He doesn’t spend much time doing tests. He did a group of words as noise changed. Said I got 8 out of 10. But. I don’t trust his test. I’d like Doc Cliffs test
I haven’t had REM yet because workman’s comp doesn’t pay unless there’s a change in my hearing
Ah. Got it. At least you had a word comprehension test with the background noise context. Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. 
I remember when I brought up this fact that Oticon advertised on their YouTube video that the Intent goes up to 10 KHz, which I thought was also a new thing (because Oticon made it a point to bring it up), one of the registered provider on this forum (I forget who) corrected me that previous Oticon models already also went up to 10 KHz. I’m just relaying this info here because I haven’t bothered to verify this yet.
Nevertheless, I pointed out that what’s the point of extending the frequency response out down to 80 Hz and up to 10 KHz if Oticon doesn’t give an 80 Hz and a 10 KHz handle on Genie 2 in the Fine Tuning section. It only goes down as low as 125 Hz and up as high as 8 KHz in the frequency gain adjustment handles. I can only assume that the gains in these handles just extrapolate out to the 80 Hz and 10 KHz non-handles.
Thanks for sharing this bit of info, @flashb1024 ! It does put my mind a bit at ease as to its price point (not exorbitant like I thought) and its availability in the aftermarket.
That sounds like the WIN test (Words in Noise), according to Dr. Cliff’s video.
The problem with the QuickSiN or WiN or HiNT tests is that there’s no DIRECT way to apply the results of those tests into the programming of the hearing aids. The HCP would have to just “wing” it and make a guess on how to adjust the programming parameters based on those results.
With the ACT test, you can just take the result and enter that information DIRECTLY into the Oticon Genie 2 software and the appropriate settings will be applied based on those results for you. So the software (which is much more knowledgeable about its parameters) does the educated guesswork for you, instead of the HCP doing the guesswork without enough information about how the software is programmed in the first place.
I was disappointed. I am used to word recognition tests that take some time. This was over in 30 seconds.
I wonder why I can’t find speech in noise tests I can do myself on the internet with my Phonak Audeo Paradise P90Rs in
As I can see on Intent graphs, their receiver can provide maximum gain up to ~8K, after this point gain falls down and disappears at 10K. So official data is 8800 Hz, not 10K https://wdhimages.azureedge.net/damfilesprod/71056ca704e4414dbbafb08800cc3255/pep/271351UK_TD_OT_Intent_MNR_24.1.pdf
Thanks for sharing this, @Lostdeaf. So even the claim by Oticon that their new receivers go up to 10 KHz is not entirely accurate then. Interesting.
I’m not even sure what kind of extra information you can get between 8 to 10 KHz anyway. For sure the speech components are well below this. I can see that some of the high timbres in music may be discovered in this range if available. But I personally don’t know if it’s really going to give a “wow” factor, as in “wow, this extension to 10 KHz does really make a difference in music to be so much more rich and clear!” kind of a wow.
Strange this happens to you… I am often in clinical practice and have patients barking, and have no issues with mine. Only time I have had hearing aids rebooting was when I had my Opns and they required replacing as the hardware was failing according to Oticon.
Ditto for me - way back in the day when I had the OPNs. A firmware update fixed that, but then Oticon never came out with the ConnectClip for that model, so I turned them in after NINE months and switched to Phonak.
That said, my Phonak aids would reboot randomly when the receiver started to die. That’s how I’m alerted if the issue crops up again! Like Cinderella’s slipper, that receiver is gonna GO. So I’d best pay attention to its rebooting.
I didn’t try, I was just searching for availability, and to respond to another post regarding pricing vs the legacy receivers.
@Lostdeaf , and @Volusiano , the frequency response is directly proportional to the speaker power:
Those tricky Oticonians don’t mention that little fact in their propaganda!
Maybe they were rounding (up) to the nearest 1 KHz 
The frequency response of the Oticon receivers as stated in the technical data sheet for the various models hasn’t really changed much since the OPN. The following response numbers are for 85 dB receivers for the 1 version in an “Ear simulator” as found in the technical data sheet:
OPN 1 120-9500
OPN S 1 120-9500
More 1 100-9500
Real 1 100-9500
Intent 1 100-9400
The response for a different testing device (2CC Coupler) is typically more compressed (lower high frequency cutoff). Some models are shown with a slightly higher cutoff for the 60 dB receivers (More 1 is 9600 for example). There is also a statement that the fitting bandwidth for the 1 versions is 10kHz with a footnote of “Bandwidth accessible for gain-adjustments during fitting”.
Note - the high end frequency response is falling off quickly and the use of a log scale for frequency accentuates this in the graphs. I typed in the values for the 85 dB receivers as I have the sheets for those which I downloaded when I was using them.
I’m probably not going to update my Real 1 aids until LE Audio and Auracast are a bit more mature and available on a wider range of devices (phones and computers and hearing aids) and interoperability is better. I lived through trying to make WiFi work when it first came out - very frustrating for quite some time with lots of firmware updates for both AP and clients that fixed some things and broke others …
The bandwidth isn’t proportional to the receiver power at all. They all run roughly the same bandwidth, but you need to look at the actual output at the ‘shoulder’ in the response around 8Khz(log).
You’ll see that most of them roll off pretty sharply.
The likelihood is: if you needed to be fitted with a 100/105db receiver, the reduced level at 8KHz is going to drop out of your audibility range pretty quickly, whereas someone with a milder loss using the 85dB receiver - is actually going to benefit in real terms from a broader response, as they have sufficient hearing in the 8-10 KHz range to benefit from the improvement.
One should always remember that the ‘value’ of this extra fidelity is only four very squeaky notes on the piano scale. So perhaps not worth the amount of attention the manufacturers give it, other than it making a good marketing statement.
Regarding open contacts of HAs, you MIGHT feel 10V if contacts are placed on your tounge. A lithium cell is 4.2V max. So, even if the HA contacts are energized you won’t feel that no matter how much you sweat. Try wetting your neck and placing a 9V battery against it.
Phonak Audeo has same contacts, so it is a proven solution
For me, since I am mostly deaf to higher freq, amplifying them to 100db levels just creats pain So, the extended freq range is only useful for ppl with low to moderate hearing loss who can actually hear higher freq when amplified.
And besides, if there was voltage between the contacts then there’d be current across your skin, which would drain the battery.
Thanks, as always, for correcting my ASS-U-ME tions!
I know in my case nothing is going on above 7K, anyway.
No worries, the problem in this game (as in many) is separating the spin from the reality.
‘Performance Stats’ get used to drive marketing value, but they’re often not wholly indicative of the actual implementation.
A car I drive has about 300 BHP, which isn’t bad, but thats not really a headline figure these days. It’s from 2002, but it has an active body control system which means it stays dead flat on the corners. It’s literally better where the rubber meets the road as the wheels don’t lean over during cornering. My AMG is faster, but as you approach a corner, the ability to keep everything flat and level on the Nankang tyres is critical.
Likewise, using performance at the limit of receiver output is relative to the situation AND the ability of the device to use the extra in practice.
I agree, streaming has gotten better with S22 relative to Real.
