Reprogramming My Bernafons for Music

Hearing Aids
,
#9

Congratulations on what you accomplished. I’m wondering what your experience listening to music has been. I have been unable to listen to music for the past eight or nine years. Notes seem out of pitch. I don’t hear the higher frequencies. One audiologist told me that most people with my audiogram are able to interpret music correctly. Very few, like myself, cannot and that there is no help for me via hearing aids. All she did was create a program which didn’t favor voice. It did no good. At this point I have six year old Agil pros.

I’m back on this forum because I’m thinking of purchasing new aids and want to read about what others have experienced. (Yours is the first post I’ve
read. ) Any input you might have would be appreciated.

1 Like
#10

I am azureblue, aka Rick Ledbetter. I have been self programming through 5 sets of aids and I am a performing magician. Been there and done that and had words with many an ossified hearing specialist…

For music, #1 - turn off all sound processing. you can’t do anything right when the active sound processing is searching for feedback, noise, background noise speech to enhance, wind noise. etc. Anti feed back thinks a flute is feedback and noise reduction thinks a sax or trumpet is just racket… 2 - if you want to try the built in in situ, run it three times after turning off the sound processing. 3 -I prefer WRDC for music because of the smoothness and a less brittle sound. 4- I prefer target of Adult DSL-v5 because it is less harsh in the music mids. 5- Spreading the Eq curves does help the dynamic range but then you run into a flaw in the algorithm which is a slow compression release time. Music needs a quick release but most aids settle for a three second or so release time, and the further apart you have the three EQ curves, the more obvious that will be. 6 - open up the MPOs (limiters) so they are not kicking in too soon. They are the to prevent overamplification but often they are set too low, again, focused on speech, so they will squash the peaks.

Most aids’ music programs is set for recorded music. This means music that has been compressed and limited with the dynamic range reduced, so that is why the so called music programs don’t work for live music.

A couple of helps - get a pitch to frequency chart and play a piano on note at a time, making a not of what notes are too loud and others too soft. Very generally speaking this can be used to adjust the 65db (normal) Eq band, but also the 50 db (soft) EQ band, too

Get a real time analyzer app for your cell phone, one that will display a bar graph, and all ow you to save the readout. This will tell you what frequency and at what db level, which will go a very long way to fine tuning your aids.

What Marshall did for Bernafon was to essentially recreate the old RIAA curve for aids. This reduces the top and bottom at the input stage and restores it at the output, to take the load off the microphone and CPU. But newer aids have more powerful processors and while this was very effective, as usual, things have progressed so that technology has lessened the need of it. Great idea though.

1 Like
#11

@azureblue ,

Could you explain me, why you run three times the insitu-Measurement after turning off sound processing? It is because the audi also makes one sound three times in the hearing test?

Thanks, Haens

1 Like
#12

@nancyb " I’m wondering what your experience listening to music has been". I’m not quite sure what you are asking here Nancy. I listen to music all the time, in my car, in my theater, at my church, where I am responsible for all the sound systems. I have been listening to music for many years, and pursuing high fidelity sound since 1965. With regard to notes seeming out of pitch, you may have a touch of diplacusis (Google for definition). This phenonemon unfortunately has no cure as far as I know, and you just have to learn to live with it. Hearing aids do not help, but with time and good reproduction by the aids, you may be able to live with it without too much aggravation. It is helpful to deemphasize the worst frequencies in the aid programming. The audiologist that told you that you should be able to interpret music correctly must not be familiar with diplacusis (some are not). I’m not sure what else I can tell you that might be helpful.

@azureblue I certainly agree with most of what you said…at least the parts I understood (WRDC?)! I don’t find the compression release time noticeable in my Bernafon or K-Amp analog aids. Maybe @Musician 72 can enlighten us. I absolutely agree about recorded music being over-compressed…that’s why I use some older high quality uncompressed music for critical evaluations. I do not notice the compression release time in either my Bernafons or the analog K-Amp aids. The K-Amp chip uses ‘adaptive compression’ (see the adaptive compression discussion in the Killion paper), which results in fast release times. I don’t know what Bernafon uses, but it seems to work similarly. I agree the old RIAA trick is clever, and it certainly works. I have noticed no clipping with my Bernafon aids at any SPL I can tolerate.

I wonder if other folks have noticed this problem. When I first got my Rexton aids, the default gain in the music program was way too high. Even at high input SPL, the aid was still amplifying, when it should have been near unity gain (no aids needed). The same thing happened with the Bernafons. I had to turn down the volume in the Live Music program 6-7 clicks to get it down to where it should have been, but it still did not sound right. At the time, I assumed the manufacturer knew what they were doing and perhaps the audiologist just adopted the default programming per the auto adjustment software. When the results with two aids were not acceptable, I decided it was time I learned to program myself. The Killion paper opened my eyes and I recognized that the combination of lower gain at maximum compression (high input SPL), and the adjustment of the level dependent frequency response just might do the trick. It did. I should mention that I use open domes, and Juna 9 picoRITE aids. I have no idea whether what I have done would be at all helpful with CIC or other aid embodiments.

Thanks for all the responses. This is a good discussion.

Paul

1 Like
#13

averaging. Even if you run it three times back to back, there wills till be little variances. If you run it once a week you get different readings, even though logic says it should be the same settings for each run. No,I don’t know why in situ does that. I guess it’s varying acoustical properties of the ear canal, but that doesn’t make sense to me, either.

#14

way back, the problem was the analog to digital convertors at the input. Then, aids could barely handle 85db and keep the delay down and the conversion top end to 16Khz. But now the processors are much faster and can handle high volumes without distorting or causing processing delays, and without sacrificing the high end. I haven’t been on the bleeding edge of things but I think negligible delay with 44.1k/ 16 bit is either being done or will soon be. Or maybe I missed the boat and it’s 24 bit by now…

Mead had a great paper on the subject, I have it around somewhere, but he did his with analog and with analog compression, plus a different compression / limiter scheme.

#15

Hello to all,
After wearing out a pair of Oticons, I tried a custom built analogue K-Amp RIC HA. I have what the audiologists call a ‘flat’ hearing loss. They sounded pretty good, but when comparing them to a pair of Bernafon Zerena 9 miniRITEs, I sent the K-Amps back. The Bs are ‘close enough’ and have a much better warranty, etc. I also tried a good set of Starkeys, unimpressed.

I’m interested in being able to tinker with my programming too. The Costco audiologist seems knowledgeable, but I think I could tweak the better in my own listening environment. Are the new Bernafons capable of DIY programming I wonder? If so, what equipment would I need?

Thanks!

#16

The ZERENA 9|7|5 miniRITE Product Information document says FittingLINK 3.0 (wireless programming interface) so maybe these can only be programmed with a wireless programming device. I don’t see any information about cable connections.

#17

In the document of Bernafon you can read (in german) that for fitting the traditional connection (programming adapter with Hi-Pro or other) is also possible:

61712537-1AA1-42C7-A587-E000E36614ED
61712537-1AA1-42C7-A587-E000E36614ED.jpeg1862×1371 427 KB

And his program is very similar to the for OPN:

EB10C35E-AA01-4178-A929-2907B48E5F4D
EB10C35E-AA01-4178-A929-2907B48E5F4D.jpeg1962×984 162 KB

#18

Thanks @Haens; The German Product and Technology Brochure says;

  1. Der FittingLINK 3.0 USB Adapter ist abwärtskompatibel mit der FittingLINK Neck Loop. Die Möglichkeit der Programmierung mit Kabeln und HI-Pro, EXPRESSlink3 oder NOAHlink steht ebenfalls zur Verfügung.
  2. The FittingLINK 3.0 USB Adapter is backwards compatible with the FittingLINK Neck Loop. The possibility of programming with cables and HI-Pro, EXPRESSlink3 or NOAHlink is also available.

I’m speculating that you can use CS44 cables with Flex Strips (sames as Oticon) to slide into the slot above the battery door. Like the Oticon Alta and the Oticon Opn;

c6

1 Like
#19

Thank you for this info, Paul!

I’ve been wearing hearing aids for 17 years now and learned a bit about them from the angle of a musician (singer/guitar+).

The programming away from the audiogram brings up the point I am still unclear about.

How best to capture as close as possible what my wonderful Martin guitars really sound like, relate that to my particular hearing loss, and create a program which will capture and reproduce that wonder sound accurately to me… Frustrating as it seems that there is really only one “REAL” EQ setting on an aid which would really realize that, for instance a 82hz low E string on my guitar - say I’ve lost 30 DB at that frequency, and lost only 20 DB at the G string 196hz frequency, but lost 35 DB at the high E string 330hz frequency.

It seems to me that, IF an aid could address those frequency bands (as we’d call them on the rack mount recording studio equalizer), there would only be one setting or curve if you like, which would accurately correct and boost the DB level for each of those frequencies to let me hear the guitar accurately again.

How far off base am I in that supposition?
The human singing voice and the acoustic guitar primarily function in the 50-500hz range.

Most hearing aids don’t have much (if any) fine tuning for equalizer bands in this range.

What aid has the most control in that range?

Thanks,

Dave

“I am Everyman and the things inside of me
are in every man; they just vary by degree.
I’m a poet, I’m a pauper, I’m a picker, I’m a king.
I am Everyman and a part of everything.”

Kentucky Dave Trabue
[/quote]

1 Like
#20

Take a look at the Genie 2 programming software below used for the Oticon OPN which operates on 64 frequency channels (which is about the most channels available that I’ve seen). Despite this, you can see that the fine tuning control, either for the compression ratio (as seen on the upper area) and the fine tuning at the bottom, is only available in 16 bands. And the granularity at the low end is 125, 250, 500 Hz.

So you’re not going to be able to make adjustment for a 30dB loss at 82Hz or 20dB loss at 196 Hz or 35dB loss at 330Hz. The best you can do is to get your audiogram to measure your loss at 125, 250 and 500Hz granularity and Genie 2 will try to fine tune your loss based on these bands and that’s it. This is not just a Genie 2 OPN thing but I would venture to guess that most hearing aid brands and models only allow 16 bands fine tuning even if they do 64 band processing like the OPN does.

I think it’s way too academic (and maybe even naive) to think that the ability to test your hearing loss at precisely the notes on the music scale and have the hearing aids compensate for those loss points precisely will yield accurate hearing results for you anyway. I think the physiology of the hearing loss problem is way more complicated than that and trying to micro-manage the loss compensation like you propose is not necessarily going to be effectively accurate like you think, even if the receiver technology can deliver the low compensation that you want (which it cannot), and the software can provide the kind of fine tuning that you’re looking for (which it does not, at least apparently here in this case).

image
image.png1219×756 81 KB

1 Like
#21

I appreciate that input and feared it might be the case.

#22

Many players prefer analog aids when performing that provide a more linear response. They are BTE or canal models that can provide a larger receiver. They are fairly inexpensive compared to digital.

1 Like
#23

Hard to find. Do you know any good sources these days?

Thanks!

#24

Wow, damn good info. mate…I am having the same problems with my $4000/- Phonak etc. and now using the the 2003 Unitron for playing the guitar etc. with NO real problems!

#25

Cannot Access this Link at all…please send me the PDF if you don’t mine? Cheers from Toronto.

#26

Cannot Open the PDF Link? Please send me Copy if you can…cheers from Toronto…I am having the same problem since 20 years now!

#27

Cannot open the PDF Link? Can you send me a Copy please…cheers from Toronto…similar problems for me since 20 years now!

#28

I can access the link.