User Review of Whisper Hearing Aids

Frequency lowering is most helpful for people with a ski slope hearing loss that is a severe or profound loss on the high frequencies end but moderate loss only in the low frequencies end. So by lowering the high frequency sounds that those people can’t hear well even with heavy amplification into a lower frequency range where they can hear better, it makes those high frequency sounds available for them to hear again.

Someone like my type of ski slope loss can really benefit from frequency lowering. Looking at your type of hearing loss, however, Bill, it’s not a steep ski slope (kinda flat’ish on the average) and your high end loss is not quite severe to profound yet, so I don’t think frequency lowering for your type of loss would be as helpful as it would be for someone like me.

There is a trade off when you use frequency lowering because you’ll lose the authenticity of the sounds that get lowered to the lower frequency range, so unless it can be very helpful for you, you’d probably rather not want to use it to preserve the integrity of the sound. So if I were you, I’d rather not use it. But if you’re curious and interested to try it out, I guess it wouldn’t hurt if you can enable it in one of the programs so you can do A to B comparison to see if you may like it or not.

Thanks so much, V. I’ll see what my Audi says at my appointment this week, but I certainly feel better prepared to have that conversation after your explanation. :+1:

At the audiologist’s office yesterday, while getting the receiver in my left earmold replaced, I heard that a new Whisper earpiece is coming out soon.

The receiver replacement was done by an audiologist I hadn’t met before, a young woman who’s been wearing hearing aids her whole life. She’d like to try Whisper but is outside their current fitting range. She agreed with me that the new earpieces aren’t likely to be rechargeable.

My understanding is that Whispers are very demanding of batteries. They use 675 size and I’ve heard they get less than a week out of them. No rechargeable is going to supply that amount of power in anything of reasonable size. 675 in a RIC rated up to 90dB loss is a pretty unusual combination.

1 Like

@happymach: Perhaps this is due to the discrepancy between your audiogram and the much more severe losses that the engineers at the Big 6 target when they are designing their devices for the broader marketplace. Perhaps the compromises they had to make to accommodate more severe challenges than those posed by your individual hearing deficit have diluted the suitability of these devices for you.

(I’d be interested to read @Volusiano 's take on my opinion.)

My $0.02/YMMV

I think that of course @happymach is entitled to his opinion that none of the big 6 delivers acceptable speech in noise performance and that Whisper delivers it. But @SpudGunner does have a good point that @happymach’s hearing loss is very different from most others hearing challenged people in that most others’ hearing losses are usually much more challenging, while @happymach 's hearing is actually quite normal all the way up to 3 KHz, then only mild at 4 KHz and moderate at 6-8 KHz on the left and moderately severe at 6-8 KHz on the right.

If I were to characterize @happymach’s hearing loss, I’d say that @happymach has an almost normal hearing, except for a mild to moderate loss on the VERY HIGH frequency ends only. I would surmise that most people with that type of almost normal hearing would not even want to bother with wearing hearing aids. At least I wouldn’t personally.

But speech in noise is always a challenge, even for normal or almost-normal hearing people sometimes. That’s why there are over the counter ear buds out there like the one from Bose and a few others that promote the aid of speech in noise assistance even for normal hearing people in noisy environments. If I find speech in noise a challenge and have an almost normal hearing, I’d most likely use those types of over the counter earbuds to help me out with speech in noise as needed, instead of wearing hearing aids full time, but that’s just me. There’s nothing wrong with almost normal hearing folks wanting to wear hearing aids to compensate for their mild loss, either. It’s purely subjective.

Anyway, back to the topic of discussion at hand. I’d surmise to say that a hearing aid would barely help @happymach’s hearing loss at 4 KHz, and maybe a little more so @ 6-8 Khz, but probably not much elsewhere from the 0-4 KHz range. Yeah, there are components of sounds that extend out to the 4-8 KHz range, but they’re only a tiny section of the sound spectrum.

This is not a lot of help to begin with. Not because the big 6’s HA speech in noise performance is mediocre and are not helpful like in @happymach’s opinion, but simply because they’re not really tuned in and designed to serve normal or almost-normal hearing folks that can’t be helped that much in the first place. For those folks, in the speech in noise arena, you need to bring out the big guns like AI, and probably not just AI crammed in a tiny earpiece along with everything else in a hearing aid where compromises for space have to be made, but AI in a (relatively) big box with no compromise like with Whisper, to solve the speech in noise problem for them.

I’d worry more if more hearing challenged folks are critical of the big 6’s performance, specifically in regards to speech in noise. But apparently they’re all doing well and prosper and serve hearing challenged folks just fine in that space. They just don’t aim at serving small niches like the almost-normal hearing folks in the first place, so I personally think it’s no big deal if they’re viewed as mediocre at speech in noise by folks in those tiny niches.

It reminds me when I first started wearing hearing aids years ago and wondered why don’t they service HAs all the way to 20 KHz instead of stopping short at 8 KHz. Afterall, normal human hearing range goes up to 20 KHz. Many audiophile headphones and speaker systems already have a frequency response of up to 20 KHz to match it. But pretty soon, I understood the practicality of narrowing down the scope to focus on helping restoring hearing where it helps the most, between 0-8 KHz. So if you’re only getting help from 6-8 KHz out of this already narrowed down range, that’s a very small ROI in the first place and the expectation should be adjusted accordingly.

Below are the audiogram that belongs to @happymach and a hearing loss level chart for reference.


1 Like

This is very exciting news! I’ll contact my audiologist.

We’re just going in circles here, gents. Please, let’s move on!

1 Like

Well, I have confirmation from Whisper that they are indeed working on the second generation of the Whisper hearing aids. There’s no release date yet, but they will be rechargeable.

I’m also curious to why some people are averse to rechargeable hearing aids. One person (not from here) commented on another forum that her husband would be deaf while the hearing aids recharge, but presumably one charges them overnight, when one generally doesn’t want to hear?

The first version of the Oticon’s charger is a terrible concept. It ties you up to an external power source. However, there are multiple situations where you are not around a power outlet or can’t wait much for your hearing aids to charge. For instance, think about an overnight flight, say NYC to Tokyo. What do you do with your hearing aids when they beep the first time signaling time to get more juice?

Oticon’s second generation is way more convenient. It comes with a power bank that gives you three full charges, dries out the hearing aids while charging, safely stores away your hearing aids, and can conveniently go in pockets or bags.

In this case, I think Oticon’s move to rechargeable, coupled with a poor charger’s design, did not help convince people that we should move from the 3 years’ worth of disposable batteries to the more environmental friendly rechargeable counterpart (a single pair would run for the same 3 years).

@happymach: As I’ve mentioned in several different threads:

  1. I wear my HAs from 16-18 hours a day.
  2. On two occasions, I have had to attend the emergency department in the middle of the night, before my
    More1s were fully charged. Unlike some of the more fortunate, I cannot make out speech without my hearing aids.
  3. I made the mistake of wearing my backups to the hospital - Unitron North Moxi Fit 800s, which ConnectHearing could never get properly adjusted to my hearing.
  4. The poor performance of my Unitron devices was more than annoying: I believe it compromised the quality of the cardiac health care I received.
  5. Had my Oticon More1 hearing aids been equipped with disposable batteries, there would never have been a problem.

I hope this satisfies your curiosity.

Best regards,
SpudGunner
:gun::potato::gun:

1 Like

I’m impressed that the next gen will be rechargeable. Going from 675 to rechargeable is a big step.

1 Like

My new aids are rechargeable. I was skeptical, having always used batteries. Now, I’ll never go back to batteries. I get–oh gee,I forget, more than 24 hours per charge, but I’ve never come close to testing those limits. (I have telecoil simply because it adds another several hours of usage.) The aids come with a portable power pack/carrying case. In a pinch, a modest charge of thirty minutes or so will buy me several hours of use.
This isn’t hard. I can imagine some extreme case where having batteries would be better. I still have my back up aids, that are battery powered, and that function very well. Don’t most of us old time users have back up aids that will function in a pinch?
So, as I said, I’ve come around to preferring rechargeable aids.

@jeffrey: I don’t understand how this works - could you please explain how t-coil adds usage time? Thanks.

I’m not sure! I think it may simply be that the telecoil version of the Siginia Ax7 that I have has a larger battery. The BTE portion of the aids is slightly larger than the non-telecoil version because of the larger battery. For me, this wasn’t an issue.
I could go sleuth out the specs, but I’m too, um busy (lazy) right now. I know that I get several more hours per charge, maybe as many as 6, if I recall correctly. Significant enough that the decision was easy to make.

@jeffrey: I’m busy, too. But that claim sounds fishy to me. Perhaps @Volusiano or some other tech whiz could help us out?

Well, I just spent five fruitless minutes on Google sleuthing to no avail. My audi offered telecoil or non telecoil, and suggested the former because of improved battery life. That’s all I know! I went with telecoil and the slightly larger aids. Again, the difference in charge life was significant enough to be an easy decision for me.

@SpudGunner → I think @jeffrey is probably correct in his assessment (above in bold) that the reason he found the Signia telecoil version to last more than a non-telecoil version of the Signia is most likely due to the fact that the telecoil version uses a larger size battery than the non-telecoil version, hence a longer battery life between replacements.

It seems to make sense that because the addition of the telecoil already dictates the hearing aid to be larger than the non-telecoil version, this affords the mfg to be able to use the larger size battery as well, so one trade-off turns a disadvantage into an advantage to even out.

Personally, if the two versions (telecoil vs non-telecoil) use the same battery size, I really can’t think of a reason why the telecoil version would be more energy efficient than the non-telecoil version. Granted, if one uses the telecoil mode a lot more often, especially in lieu of wireless streaming if the content is broadcasted via a magnetic loop in their setup, then it’d be a no brainer that the telecoil use would not use as much energy as wireless streaming.

As for telecoil use vs mic pickup usage, although the telecoil doesn’t really need to be energized by the battery because it’s the magnetic field carrying the sound signal that will energize the telecoil automatically, I don’t think the juice required to energize the mic in the mic-usage mode is significant enough to make a noticeable difference. Most of the energy used is usually in the processing stage and the amplification end-stage to the receiver, and also in the wireless communication in the streaming mode. The energy provided to the mics used for sound pickup should be miniscule compared to the receiver amplification and the other stages/modes.

1 Like

@jeffrey ; @Volusiano : Sorry to bave questioned you, Jeffry. I didn’t understand what would make the telecoil model last so much longer. @Volusiano 's explanation has clarified that … Exactly!.

Thank you both. I am now the wiser for this exchange.

No problem; question away! Nothing wrong with that.

1 Like