How much of a price difference should there be between the wireless and non-wireless versions of the Phonak Marvel when purchased through an Audi? I am having a difficult time finding a price on the internet for the non-wireless. I assume the technology should cost less and the work from the Audi should be less. Is that the wrong assumption?
Not sure what you mean, but the only real choices with Marvels (and Paradises) is rechargeable vs disposable batteries and battery size if you get disposables. They all have standard Bluetooth capability if that’s what you mean by wireless. There is also the technology level: 30,50,70 and 90, but they have all Bluetooth. Although the least expensive tech level is 30, it won’t require any less work from the audi to fit.
Phonak makes non-wireless versions of its Virto M hearing aid at all technology levels. You can see them listed in Phonak’s user guide on page 3. The 70 model is Phonak Virto M70-10 NW 0. See page 3 of linked document below. https://www.phonak.com/content/dam/phonakpro/gc_hq/en/products_solutions/hearing_aid/virto_m_titanium/documents/User_Guide_Virto_M_92x125_EN_V1.00_029-0812-02.pdf
My understanding of in the ear type hearing aids that do not have wireless (Bluetooth) capabilities are that they are too small for the wireless equipment inside the aid. It’s about size, not price I believe.
Ah. I’m RIC centric! I think Raudrive is right that it’s about size. ITEs may have wireless capabilities. CIC and ICIC generally do not.
Understood, but should a Virto M-70 cic hearing aid without Bluetooth costs less than the ric version with Bluetooth.
You could argue that, but on the other hand, to be fair, for CIC/MC/ITC aids there is the customisation of the Shell - which has to be sent off - sure - the same thing happens for custom receivers in RICS. I had bluetooth in the ITC + Customisation for the same price as the RIC Audeo, so I was not complaining at the time.
Thank you, that is helpful to know