I agree. In my first comparison attempts, I generated a spreadsheet with over 500 words and then wrote a function to generate random subsets of 50 words. Then I had a live speaker read them to me. According to my audiologist, the community frowns on spoken tests (because they are non-repeatable), and I didn’t want to ask my friends to record a bunch of lists. Nevertheless, I do think the test was fair – because of the order of the tests, there was a bias in favor of the Oticons.
4 Likes
Personally, I don’t think that the Sphere is that much better than the Intent. From my point of view they are both equal but I dare say I understand better with the Intent.
@Misterref78 , I don’t see your audiogram, but from what I know, Oticon’s receivers are very good at amplifying higher frequencies, reportedly better than Phonak’s. Maybe that makes a difference.
Sorry I tried also to put it in the Audigram like you did, but I cannot see the place to put it in, I am directed to another page.
And yes this may be, and I also said for me, because we also heard only good things from ppl that works for them.
1 Like
Which Phonak receivers did you use? P? And what acoustic coupling? Power domes?
1 Like
That’s an interesting perspective. If they are equal for you but you understand speech better with the Sphere, then there must be things you like better with the Intent. For me, the Intents are better for music, which is a high priority for me, but not as high as having a flowing conversation in a noisy environment. I started another thread on Sphere vs Intent for music.
Thanks with the directlink I went to the hearing test section.
I use P receivers and have slimtip with 1mm vent.
I cannot say that my hearing is better with Phonak, overall I would say that the Oticon is better for me. I am sure I have to adjust the Phonak more but so far I am not really happy with them.
For me the Spherics is not better than the Edge+ in Starkey, it sounds more like the speech in noise program from Resound Nexia. I think I like more the normal sound arround me than possible pushing speech from everywhere.
1 Like
It does, even Dr. Cliff mentions Intents tent to match targets better out the box - I suppose it might be
due to the Open sound optimizer , it doesn’t imply its better aid- rather than in the absence of proper verification Itents would probably get closer to match targets.
1 Like
Okay, I though it’s because of better frequency response from receivers from Otocon. Phonak’s receiver responses for example:
1 Like
Unlikely that there’s much physical difference between the receivers. Cross reading a few threads here, how Phonak traditionally handles high gain in receivers vs Oticon might be more of an issue. Perhaps there’s a better final comparison circuit that stops the receiver becoming unstable/clipping/saturated in the Oticon.
My pet Theory always used to be that because Phonak always used some frequency shifting/squeezing in their gain (FBM) management to achieve higher drive levels (and Acti-Vents), they could never use a very high resolution input/final output comparison to retain final sound quality.
I’m not sure if the issue runs through the Sphere line, but it sounds like that. I expect someone is currently reading this in Switzerland and we’ll see firmware updates before Christmas.
2 Likes
Thanks for your professional input (pun non-IntenTed) 
However, what about users who don’t use frequency lowering/SoundRecover2 and ActiveVent?
“Resolution” - you mean sampling rate? Or spectral fidelity?
Do you think this is an issue, for which reason is more likely due to firmware than hardware? Interesting.
Perhaps @Michael_Phonak could read it.
1.It’s not turning on the Frequency Lowering function, it’s inherent pitch shifting (frequency lowering) which they’ve (Phonak) always done. It’s why there’s always been some issues around music reproduction, unless the AutoSense has detected there’s music present.
(Edit: Like driving a Mercedes with the traction control ‘off’. Except it isn’t, not fully.)
- Sorry I meant Spectral Fidelity - in essence, (as close to) retaining the integrity of the original in the reproduction - or why people still like analogue Amplifiers, with no sampling delays, retained proportionality of loudness growth etc.
1 Like
Haha thanks for the trust. But I must admit I am not sure if I understand the real question…
This difference is HUGE! For example, Oticon Xceed UP can take 130 dB at 3K. Phonak Naida L UP cannot do it.
I meant the construction was the same - I genuinely hadn’t realised that they dropped to a smaller receiver with the UP. That’s pretty poor tbh - especially for profound losses.
We don’t really see them here as they tend to be dealt with inside of the NHS.
Did I mention that Spheric is bullshit for me? ;-D
No really, yesterday in a loud restaurant, with the Intent it was possible to understand the people next to me but it was loud and not comfortable.
I switched then to Sphere and the understanding in noise was much better than the Spherics, very disapointing for me, but I could say that I could maybe switch to the normal Infinio, because it was more relaxing to understand in noise, not that good as the Starkey but the sound quality is better, but on the other hand I am not many time in this situation.
Does anyone know how the battery life is with the normal Infinio?
how do you get a copy of your audiogram from audioligist?
For most, you ask. One said I had to make a records request from the agency formally. One place put it in my hands to discuss the testing results and implications. The place that asked me to make a formal request had shown my test results on a big screen and went over it with me. Probably would have given me a print of it at that moment but asking for it a bit later it was a problem.
WH
2 Likes