Starkey Heairng aids for profound loss

Anyone here wearing Starkey Genesis or Evolv for profound loss ?
Looking for opinions.

Check my audiogram I have severe to profound and wear the starkey evolv AI Bicros and am happy with them.

1 Like

Laura, I have severe loss although I have not posted my latest audiogram. Recent test showed only 25 percent comprehension and they want me to undergo testing for coculair implant. They called Starkey and reviewed my situation. Starkey recommended Evolo 2400ais with 13 battery BTE. Most powerful they have I am very pleased. Lots of power in all settings. This is probably my fifth cycle of Starleys so can’t compare to other makers. Suggest you try what Starkey recommends.

1 Like

Yes. I have a Starkey Evolve AI with CROS on my bad side. It allows sounds on that side to go into my good ear through a microphone. There is no hearing aid on the bad ear. I have had these since November and I’m very pleased but Starkey just came out with the new Genesis AI model which is supposed to be even better. I will be fitted with those on 5/22 so can update you further in a few days.


I don’t like the the new aids that uses the battery size 13. Depending on how much power you need for those with deep profound hearing loss, the 13 battery will not last a week. It’s why l prefer aids with the 675 battery.

I have profound hearing loss with full deafness after 3K. And I have 11 days on battery 13 with my Oticon Chili, Oticon Dynamo, and Xceed 2 and 1.

That’s interesting. Mine with 13 size battery doesn’t last a week because l do lots of TV streaming every day.

Not yet, but also looking into those.

Here is an interesting question we recently discussed with my friends : do you think that hearing test online is as accurate as a professional hearing test in the audiology clinic or is there a huge difference between those two? Appreciate some opinions here.

No debate here, obviously your audiogram done at the clinic is the most accurate, to many variables online.

Thanks for your answer. I was just thinking that someone had both and can compare them

I have done a few over the years, I’ve found that the online are only any good when calibrated, otherwise it’s to hard to know exactly, using the manufacturer’s software in-situ audiogram has given me best results in this regard for programming HAs, it’s shown to be quite close to the audiogram performed by the clinics, different in a few frequencies of course (which was a good thing in my case)