Since I’m due to switch out “any day now” to trial the Omnias, it’s not worth a 14-mile round trip and the audi’s time just to adjust the high frequencies, IMHO. Except for things with high-pitched squeals not quite sounding as loud as I’m used to. all the sounds in the world sound pretty good with the Lumitys. And that one extra notch I added in the treble actually makes most other high-pitched sounds sound too “scuffy,” e.g., objects rubbing against each other. I think if I really wanted an apples-to-apples comparison, I’d have to ante up for custom molds for both the Lumitys and the Omnias (I’m only doing it for the Omnias to trial the M&RIE receivers, which I wouldn’t be able to wear without a very occlusive fit).
I could have asked the audi to do a remote session to adjust the fit. At the time I got my Quattros four years ago, she had never done one and from the way she talked about it, certainly wasn’t “in” to doing them! Never had a remote session with her and that’s something I should check out about her current attitudes. She has always been quite accepting of me DIY’ing, but I didn’t want to muck around with her trial HA’s, especially since Phonak is probably more intent on collecting and analyzing data from trial users than regular HA wearers (I consented to full data collection to reward Phonak and my audi for a completely free trial, e.g., I’m allowing Phonak to track everywhere I go through the myPhonak app).
I’d agree for the most part the Lumity does a great job of automatically adjusting to the environment and delivers a really good sound. I haven’t trialed the Omnias yet and as mentioned just above in this post, I’ve perhaps favored the Omnias by having custom molds made for them, but not for the Lumitys. My only previous comparison is to the ReSound Quattros, which is a four-years-older model.
I do think, though that the Lumity sound is a more processed sound than the Quattros and as you say, can very rapidly switch, so that rapid switching makes one more aware of processing changes. The one example I previously gave was switched on aerated tap water running vigorously in the bathroom. The Lumity promptly suppressed that noise, promptly cutting into speech recognition of my wife’s soft voice (which blends naturally into the tap water sound!). The Quattros by comparison seem more stuck in the program mode you’ve set them in, which has both its good and bad points. As long as noise isn’t too loud and annoying, I’d rather hear it “as it really is” (whatever that is!), whereas I’d say the Lumitys are very adept and aggressive at removing droning noises without interfering in other sounds and voices in a very noticeable way. And that has its good and bad points, too. I can see why for earlier Phonak models vs. Oticon Opns, etc., that the Oticon users declared that they wanted to hear the world as it really is - but IMHO whatever the “processed,” speech-focused sound is with the Lumitys, it’s really a very mild effect compared to what I expected from previous Oticon expositions on the forum. Phonak itself owned up to the processed sound “problem” in announcing the Lumitys, as in heralding Autosense 5.0, they mentioned some users of the Paradise and earlier had found Autosense 4.0 too rapid and aggressive, so they’d made the directional focusing slower and more gradual in Autosense 5.0.
I like the positions of the mics on the Lumity. Junk seems much less likely to get into the mic openings than for the Quattros. I think the mic openings on the Omnias are likely to be farther back and lower down than for the Quattros but still not as good as the Lumitys (I’ll see soon!). The plastic of the HA bodies and the charging case, although it has a much more “plasticity,” artificial feel than the plastic used by ReSound for the Quattros and their charging case, seems to be far less of a dust, earwax, …, magnet than the ReSound material and that’s great, too!