Replacement for Widex Dream 440 ITE

My Widex Mind 440 ITE-XP are getting a bit old (bought 2009). The wax guard holder has fallen off (for third time). The previous two times, once on right and once on left, the service loaner provided by Audiologist was a Phonak which was horrible. I ended up not using it at all. Recently I tried a Widex mind 330 BTE but found that it amplified the Wind noise too much and speech recognition was horrid. I was also nervous carrying it on top of my ear which made wearing glasses complicated.

To add insult to injury, my old Audi has retired and I am left searching for a new one (sigh).

To cut the long story short, is there any benefit to buying a Rexton or Resound from Costco rather than paying over $7K for a pair to a new Audi for Widex Unique? If yes, then which one is the considered recommendation of this forum?

Did I mention that I have reverse slope hearing loss and am located in Canada.

Thank you for your help.

Switching to another brand or model of hearing aid may require an adjustment period to become accustomed to the new sound quality. You mentioned that you disliked Phonak, and perhaps you would have a similar reaction to other brands. Getting the Widex Unique would likely provide an easier transition for you since you’re already familiar with their signal processing. You’ll have to weigh that against Costco’s significantly lower pricing.

Yes. I did consider the “brain training” factor. My question is aimed towards technological improvements. Between 15 channels offered by mind 440 vs 36+ channels offered by Rexton and Channel-less design offered by Resound, is there a significant difference? From single core to dual core or current quad core processing, is there an improvement or is it just market-speak?

Also, if I were to get the bin-aural wireless connected HA’s, will their performance offer parity, if not improvement, on my current Widex? I understand that the sound “quality” will differ but will word comprehension improve, reduce or stay same in noisy/quiet environment?

Going by these criteria, I will proceed with a trial and post results here. Are there any other questions/criteria I should look to answer?

There’s no compelling evidence that a massive number of channels provides any benefit. It only serves to increase processing delay which might affect sound quality. I’m sure if Widex believed additional channels were worthwhile, they would have implemented them in their latest product. ReSound’s premium products have 17 channels. And Rexton calls their latest platform “QuadCore” or “4C”, but it’s not meant to imply there’s a quad-core processor inside the hearing aid.

Binaural features may help improve your speech understanding in more difficult listening situations. ReSound aids can coordinate microphone modes changes, and Rexton devices can exchange audio information. Performing a trial is the only way to determine if these features are beneficial to you.

Are you saying Trax 42 may have worse sound quality than Resound Lynx 2 because of the increased channels? That contradicts the advice I have received on this forum from other members and senior ones at that.

— Updated —

Are you saying Trax 42 may have worse sound quality than Resound Lynx 2 because of the increased channels? That contradicts the advice I have received on this forum from other members and senior ones at that.

The important part of what is being said is that there are a number of studies that have reported that adding channels above 12-15 does not improve anything.

As to Senior status, I have that and am just your average hearing aid user with no training. The senior status is the result of the quantity of posts and not the quality.

There are several articles about this. The Sound quality is not what is being questioned.

You can represent the full bandwidth with one channel provided the loss is flat.

What more channels allow is the separate processing and amplification of the sound spectrum.

Potentially this his can add or remove gain more selectively, the downside is that there are more crossovers to be managed. This used to be an issue with linear processing, but now all manufacturers have parallel processing chips.

It still burns more cycles though, which will cost you a little in battery life. With modern receivers having around 10khz of (about 8 octaves around 1KHz) bandwidth I personally can’t see the point of more than two bands per octave. Especially as the connected receiver can’t resolve massively steep transitions from one band to another. It’s just a form of Engineer dick waving TBH.

Their latest ruse are the claims about the input range: 24 bit sampling is alowing greater than 100dB input ranges. Great you might say, until you realise that mics have a noise floor of around 20something dB, caused by Brownian interaction on the Low mass Mylar diaphragm. If you need to hear peak sounds of around 120dB that’s superb. OTOH, back in the real world you’ve probably realised that you could take your hearing aids out and still hear them quite comfortably, especially without the receiver going into distortion due to being over driven.