March 26/05:55h/ too EARLY! Am sitting at kitchen table. Alarm clock is 30’ away in bedroom, around a corner.
Morning babble on the radio sounds louder with NL2, but I can’t understand what they’re saying.
VAC+ sounds not as loud, but is somehow more intelligible. I have no idea why this is so.
So far, the NAL-NL2 rationale is giving me better speech comprehension of my soft-spoken wife, who talks to me from various parts of the house while I’m packing her lunch and clattering around the sink. That’s exactly what @Volusiano suggested might be the utility of having the NL2 rationale onboard.
With NL2, appliance humming is louder than VAC+, but it’s also allowing me to hear sounds that require my attention, such as my cat fishing medicine bottles out of the box on the counter they’re kept in, or my female Newf bringing me “gifts” like mommy’s spectacle case or gardening gloves. Don’t laugh! Being able to hear these sounds clearly is valuable to me.
Yesterday, while I was out and about, however, VAC+ seemed to give me better speech-in-noise word recognition. VAC+ also seems to create less fatigue when worn for long periods.
I don’t know the technical difference between the two rationales that would explain the unique responses of each.
Any technical gurus who can illuminate this dark corner of my comprehension?
[Zoom in on the top table, around the sound hole, if you want to see a piece of Englemann with amazing silk,as well as a gorgeous rosette!
]
To my amazement, my beloved Taylor sounds much more beautiful using VAC+ than it sounds with either NAL-NL2 or the specific music program that my audiologist set up for me.
I’ll have to try the various options with an electric guitar + (class A) valve amp …
I’m sorry, campers, but I fear my reports are becoming tedious.
My “Hearing Fitness” function in the ON app says I’m using my VAC+ rationale about 80% of the time, NAL-NL2 about 15%, and music about 5% of the time.
Spring mud chores are temporarily cutting into my morning practice (music) time - but music is going to increase significantly in the near future.
My use of NL2 is higher now than it will be - I’ve been toggling it up in a variety of situations to see how it compares to my VAC+ main program and logging more time on it than would otherwise be the case.
The scenario is unfolding much as Volusiano, jim_lewis, Raudrive, Um_bongo and others have suggested in a variety of places around the forum.
In short, Oticon’s proprietary fitting rationale (VAC+) affords me the best all-around performance over a broad range of situations.
NAL-NL2 is my go-to program when I’m having to focus on soft spoken individuals, with or without the presence of noise. It is, as several others have highlighted, more tiresome to use for protracted periods, but it has its place.
[I think there’s some tweaking to be done in the music program, but that’s not my immediate priority ]
Thus, I’ll try to curtail repeat observations of the same details, and save posts for new and remarkable observations.
Chairs
Don’t know if any of the below helps, but below is a description of the VAC+ from Oticon with some references to NAL-NL2.
The second screenshot below is a summary description of NAL-NL2 with some reference to NAL-NL1.
I generally find VAC+ to sound more natural and more full and more comfortable to listen to, probably because I already have a predisposed bias FOR it in the first place. But whenever I need to get that extra edge in sharpness to help me understand difficult to hear speech better, I would resort to NAL-NL2, or actually ultimately to DSL v5 Adult, because I find DSL v5 Adult even a little sharper than NAL-NL2.
If I listen with DSL for a long time, all the sharpness gets a little tiresome to me after a while. But after I switch back to VAC+ from prolonged listening to DSL, it’s as if VAC+ is dull, at least until I become re-acclimatized to VAC+ again to re-appreciate its well roundedness again.
Pretty sure it’s NAL-NL2 unless there’s a NS2 version I’m unaware of. Beautiful guitar. Wasn’t aware Taylor made nylon stringed guitars. I used to play at classical guitar for awhile–rarely now.
@MDB: Of course it’s NL2 - my old brain somehow forgot that detail along the way. I’ll edit for that recurring error tomorrow. Thanks for correcting me.
As for the guitar: I think in 2011, that particular Taylor NS32ce was issued as part of a President’s Series LE offering. The label is signed by Robert Taylor ( but maybe they all are - I don’t pay much attention to the marketing hype.)
It’s a great instrument for my Chet Atkins/Eark Klugh type of solo fingerstyle picking.
One day, I will have to learn to play it!
@Volusiano: thanks for the great information/insights you provide. I’ll cipher on the screen shots tomorrow.
Dumb question here, are you able to program different fitting rationale’s per stored setting? I thought the rationale was fixed for the whole device. Maybe my HA’s are too old. This is great news if you can A:B fitting algorithms at the push of a button. How do you make the comparison useful considering all the other program variables? Are all the other settings the same?
Yes, you can do it for the Oticon OPN, OPN S and More. Not sure about other brands and models but I would think that you very likely can also for the newer ones. And yes, you keep all other settings the same except changing the fitting rationales only. The OPN, OPN S and More has 4 programs available, so you can use the Oticon VAC+ in the default program, then make a copy of it and change only the fitting rationale in program 2, let’s say for NAL-NL1, then NAL-NL2 for program 3, DSL v5.0 Adult for program 4.
This is exactly what I did, and then after a while I decide which of the standard fitting rationale I want to keep, then get rid of the others. This frees up a couple of programs for me to use for something else. See example screenshot below of my program setup.
That’s great news, thanks!
I’ve been living with two different rationales (one for left and one for right) which happened by accident at the audiologist’s, but is actually not too bad haha. My L/R ears have very different hearing unfortunately. I prefer some kind of ITE format (I use headphones quite a bit), so I will check out Oticon for sure next pair of aids, which should be pretty soon. I know the ITE formats have less features than BTE and RIC, especially when it comes to wireless it seems.
@grantb5: @Volusiano has said it for me wrt the reason why I’m trying to A:B two different rationales. Our house’s flooring is dense porcelain tile throughout, to make it easier to clean up after our dogs and cats.
The floor reflects sound very well - especially the higher frequencies - and sometimes the appliances, waterworks, critters’ noises, etc, create quite a din.
My wife’s voice is normally both high in pitch and low in volume(except when she yells at me! 
).
Even though the VAC+ fitting rationale gives me great results both at home, and in the world outside of it, I sometimes wished that I could understand my wife’s speech better, here at home.
I explained my desire, as well as Volusiano’s insights to my (IMO excellent) audi, and he had no objection to giving me NAL-NL2 to try, on the understanding that I not confuse my brain with constant A:B toggling. Being a pretty self-controlled individual, I’m having no problem meeting his terms, but I am discovering that NAL-NL2 is advantageous in certain listening situations, so it will probably keep its place in the 4 programs that reside in my machines.
My use of NAL-NS2 is tempered by my fear of diminishing the good performance of VAC+ that I’m experiencing. Your question was a good one, and I hope that I have answered it.
I have not been able to do this with Phonak P90s using Target, at least yet. Changing the fit function alters existing custom programs to adopt the new one. Hopefully I’m just missing something obvious because it would be really useful.
@parishd: I can tell you that I agree - having instant access to both rationales is a boon to me!
Good luck!
My experience like Zebras is Phonak can not have different programs set up with different fitting algorithms. Oticon being able to do this is pretty slick. Great for experimentation or as Volusiano uses his for different environments. +1 for Oticon.
@Raudrive: I’m using my 2 rationales much as @Volusiano does, and it IS , indeed, slick! Very useful.
My $0.02
Mrs Spud and I watched George Clooney’s “The American” last night [
] … the cinematography of the Abruzzo region and the SOUND were excellent!
I watch about 3 movies a year, and don’t use a tv streamer. VAC+ won, hands down, for intelligibility and comfort.
NAL-NL2 seems louder and “crisper” at first, but using VAC+, I wasn’t tempted to change anything but the volume, using ON.
This is great news for me, because lack of intelligibility is one reason that I watch so little tv.
So, last night, it was Denzel Washington in some sort of audiology sequel [The Equalizer 2] … good stuff, but MrsSpud and I were tired, and the wind was howling outside. Under those conditions, NAL-NL2 afforded me easier comprehension, but I could have easily gotten by comfortably with my VAC+ program.
As @Volusiano has pointed out articulately in several prior posts: one doesn’t want to dilute the brain’s mastery of one’s preferred fitting rationale by frequently switching, but it’s nice to have the option (especially in my case where there’s such a subtle difference between VAC+ and NAL-NL2, comparatively speaking).
FYI
31 March '21: Another Tiny Tidbit of Totally Titillating Technical Trivia
I was streaming NPR while baking bread. HerSelf®️was watching TV, and the dogs were chewing NylaBones and making a good deal of clatter.
In this situation, I had better speech comprehension and clarity using my NAL-NL2 program than I did with VAC+ during a talk segment about Amazon.
When the next segment on a Baltimore jazz/blues pianist aired, VAC+ was my regime of choice.
My point: having access to the two fitting rationales is working for me. I use NAL-NL2 judiciously, but the extra “sharpness” (to use @Volusiano’s word) is definitely advantageous in certain situations.
I don’t think I will be giving it up; in fact, I may have my audiologist delete the existing music program in order to put DSLv5.0 into my machines
FYI
Keep in mind that unless you’ve been fit to target with REM, you are comparing VAC+ with what I might call for this purpose Oticon-NAL-NL2 rather than true NAL-NL2. It’s not uncommon to require quiet significant changes to what the manufacturers are calling a prescriptive target to actually fit to target. Conversely, if you’ve had REM on both, then you are comparing a VAC+/NL2 hybrid to NL2 because there are no external targets for VAC+ and it typically gets fit to NL2 targets, although I’ve seen it fit to DSL. It is also possible that a clinician adjusted to mid-level gain targets without adjusting compression when doing REM, which leaves you at something in between.
A quick look at the VAC and Oticon NL2 first fits suggests the biggest difference is more gain for soft high frequency sounds for NL2, which is consistent with a lot of things you are reporting. Any music program is going to tilt towards more low frequency gain and less compression, so your preference for VAC also makes sense, although I would expect an adjusted dedicated music program to be better.
Remember, too, that your brain adapts, particularly to mid-level gain. With consistent wear, something that sounds a bit loud will come to sound more natural. Typically, manufacturer proprietary rationales are interested in comfort and acceptance. If you are willing to chase audibility, you will generally have more success in the long run.
Just for your interest–when I do REM, the huge majority of the time I have to turn everything UP to meet prescriptive targets, often in the highs but regularly across the board. There are certainly cases where things need to come down, particularly on a small ear, although often it just needs to come down to smooth out a peak. That gain above 4 kHz that lots of adults don’t like is also what clears up confusion between s,f,t,k,z,v.
Thus far in my (short) journey with Oticon More3s, I have come to a few conclusions:
VAC+ fitting rationale gives me very good comprehension and comfort in 80-85% of situations. For reasons I can’t explain, the NAL-NL2 fitting regime brightens things up and helps my comprehension when I’m tired;
“More Sound Booster” (an ON app feature) doesn’t do much except attenuate background noise… I even suspect that it may increase the forward directionality of the HAs;
My More3s have such a blazing fast chipset that the devices give me better quality music sound than the Music program added by my audi. (We’re going to delete that and put DSLv5.0(adult) into them and see how useful it will be,) and;
I still only have had one occasion to try out More3 in a noisy restaurant setting, so I feel unqualified to offer any comments on whether the tier3 technology is adequate for my needs. [In the restaurant foray, I was having lunch with a close friend whom I hadn’t seen in months. We had a lot to catch up on, and I didn’t want to miss anything, so I toggled my ConnectClip into external mic mode and clipped it onto my friend. … I don’t think I missed a sentence!]
So, I think my experience validates @Volusiano’s advice: used judiciously, the availability of an alternative fitting rationale can definitely enhance the versatility of my devices, with and without the presence of speech.
[SpudGunner out/10-7]
