I work in ENT at a major academic medical center. I willingly let the audiologists use me as their guinea pig when I bring up an idea. It’s great!
Over the past week or so we wanted to try out DSL 5 Adult vs Adaptive Phonak Digital Contrast vs Adaptive Phonak Digital. All with REM. We called Phonak: Adaptive Phonak Digital is based closely on NAL-NL2, and it’s not inappropriate to use the NAL-NL2 for REM purposes.
Right now the clear winner is Adaptive Phonak Digital with REM tuned to NAL-NL2.
Soft voices are clearer and louder out of the box whereas DSL needed G50 to be cranked . SoundRecover2 “works better” — sh, ch sounds are clearer, more distinct and less harsh compared to DSL. (Same SoundRecover2 settings).
Adaptive Phonak Digital Contrast wasn’t for me. The words sometimes get muddy - not clear. Which makes sense given slower compression and slower attack times. I noticed it and I don’t notice it in Adaptive Phonak Digital.
I don’t plan to try out NAL-NL2 alone. With REM on Adaptive Phonak Digital, I trust the engineering and fine tuning that Phonak has done - a best of both worlds so to speak.
Additionally, I think a LOT less fine tuning will be needed with Adaptive Phonak Digital as compared to DSL. I’m shocked how good it sounds with just REM and nothing more.
What’s your experience? I’ll post more as I experience more.