Samsung spruiks Galaxy Buds Pro performance as comparable to hearing aids Samsung says a study of Samsung's Galaxy Buds Pro, conducted by the Samsung Medical Center, suggest its wireless earbuds could be a handy substitute for hearing aids. Samsung does not make hearing aids. A study [PDF] published in the peer-reviewed journal Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology found that Galaxy Buds Pro …
A colleague just had a quote.
Boots ~ £3000
Specsavers ~ £2000
Online - £600
And yes the online ones were the same model as on of the above.
Still an utter con.
Still I guess as it tends to be the older generations or those with special needs that need hearing aids, why not rip them off eh?
I suspect that most of the cost of a hearing aid is in the measurement and adjustment by a professional. In the UK of course hearing aids are completely free to those who need them, and you even get free batteries. The hearing aids supplied by the NHS are comparable with those supplied commercially.
If you have to pay, and have only mild or moderate hearing loss, some sort of amplifying device that doesn't need adjustment by a professional could be adequate. But I have moderate hearing loss and would not be without a proper aid. If you don't want to be left out of the conversation you need all the help you can get.
Of course no hearing aid is a substitute for good natural hearing. As an acoustics professional I had spent years telling people this fact to help persuade them to protect their ears against loud sounds, so I wan't surprised to experience it myself.
"In the UK of course hearing aids are completely free to those who need them, and you even get free batteries."
In a bid to stop half the World travelling to Blighty to take advantage of this, just let me add that they are free at the point of use, not free full stop. UKians pay a lot for the NHS, mostly in the form of PAYE National Insurance - estimates vary but it's certainly in the £thousands per person per year.
Whether you can technically get away with travelling there and getting free healthcare, the fact remains that the NHS is a service intended for those living in the UK, and either paying through NI or through eligible benefits.
Speaking as a UK citizen living abroad for more than 40 years, who has on occasion been tempted to head home for free treatment (and indeed has been invited to do so eg. yearly flu jab), but has resisted because it would be a flat-out abuse of the system.
And Boots & Specsavers also dispense NHS-stocked hearing aids under the "Any Qualified Provider" (AQP) scheme..... for FREE (to the user, qualifying UK residents only) . The price they get for doing so also covers several years of support, and, even for a pair, it is less than the online price quoted above..... So why not try those out first before shelling out thousands ?
glasses for my eyses, cheapest option:
boots / Specsavers / etc - 50 quid and up (plus 20 - 30 quid and up for a test)
online (one of those cheap ones, forgot the name) - 15 quid (yes, a promotion they run usually several times a year). Plus about a tenner for a discount eye test (no, not run by my friends in his shed)
btw, I read a very interesting and long online text on eyesight industry, produced around 2010, in short, smoke and mirrors (and some figures like: production cost for _any_ glasses is usually within 5 quid).
As a user of some of these funky hearing aids it is not as straightforward as just the price.
As another comment eludes to, you need to have them programmed to match your hearing loss. There are apps with some of them where you can mess about but they are not the same as putting in the correct map. They will also upgrade the firmware and replace the receivers.
Taking the £3000 at Boots, the equivalent at Specsaves looks to be around £400 cheaper, I don't know of how the ongoing support is managed. As for £600, I cannot see any at this price other than second hand.
These Samsung gizmos are an interesting concept but the one fatal flaw is that the are in-ear with a blob completely filling the ear. Many hearing aids are open design allowing natural and amplified sound to mix. For profound hearing loss there will be a closed design or more funky bits on the ends.
The behind-the-ear type are pretty robust and stable in the attachment to the wearer. With the small RIC transducer you don't really notice them. These are completely different with a sealed fit so they work as a headphone. I can also use mine with some funky microphone technologies that make a huge difference to how one can hear in difficult or specialist situations.
I have no doubt that some sort of earbud can be made to work as a hearing aid BUT, and this is really crucial, if it needs another device to operate (ie phone) then it rather limits it's use.
If you look at what goes into a noise cancelling headphone or earbud you'll find it has pretty much the same hardware as a hearing aid. With a few tweaks to configuration options you'll be into dual use device territory. The missing link is getting the personal response target set by an audiologist, which I'm sure they'll be happy to do for a fee.
The processor on a smartphone can easily run an app that allows the user to tailor the frequency response of the earbud.
(Give the app a collection of standard profiles - the user chooses the one that sounds best then can tweak the response curve further if desired.)
For the lower end of the market (eg village dwellers in India) a very cheap alternative would be basic wired earphones with the phone acting as the amplifier and frequency response corrector. The cost to such users would be the cost of the app (if anything) and the cost of basic wired earphones (under £1).
Icon for the response of the firms and audiologists selling overpriced hearing aids if this idea takes hold. ====>
There are already "monitor" apps which use the phone as the amplifier and frequency response corrector. I occasionally use them with my motorcycle helmet (fitted with speakers, or using wired earplugs) to avoid taking the helmet off in bad weather. However the problem is the latency. It's acceptable when the direct channel is blocked by ear plugs, but otherwise you hear the direct sound, followed a fraction of a second later by the amplified sound. That doesn't work for conversation.
because that would add all sorts of regulatory hoops to be jumped through, no?
Selling earbuds is fine, but selling anything medical involves all sorts of standards that must be complied with, as well as any liability which is likely to come up sooner or later...
Apple has been working on hearing aid technology for years, and licences its technology for free to hearing aid manufacturers. Some of that technology makes its way into its own products. I have 80% hearing loss in one ear. I'm using AirPods Pro, tuned using the Mimi app and find that using just one AirPod in that bad ear makes a huge difference. The one downside of using earpod-style devices vs pukka hearing aids is battery life.
If they could use this tech to treat tinnitus.
A lifetime of having my eardrums scream at me (getting slowly worse as I get older) would certainly be a boon so long as it could have some certifiable improvement.
N.B. Childhood inner ear infection which wasn't noticed until months afterwards left certain frequencies rather lacking, constant tinnitus and a legal ban on ever flying a plane so since my hearing is classified as 'poor' despite a lifetime of dealing with it and just never knowing what I'm missing (though higher quality hifi kit does have an appreciable improvement since individual sounds become clearer and thus more noticeable).
Gimp icon because my hearings been gimped for years.
I had an inner ear infection a few years ago, since then bad tinnitus, and I agree that the better the kit the better the sound. Just glad I own really good speakers.
Voices through heavy compression I cannot under stand, but decent quality, fine.
Hearing damaged against poor audio compression.
Samsung is preparing to kill somebody's Golden Goose.
I love my Nuraphones - expensive but excellent tech - and I bought the less good Nuraloops just because they seemed a good idea - great audio, crap design, maintainability and controls sadly. Both measure your hearing and build a profile and paired with a good set of drivers and their haptic "immersion" bass they deliver. They have an ambient mode too and I have mentioned to folks before they would make a cute alternative to hearing aids for some, but...
Thanks for the suggestion - my wife's hearing has been declining and her birthday is coming up pretty soon. I just placed an order. Forewarned is forearmed - I think we'll be able to deal with the shortcomings.
Have a beer on us!
Hearing aids generally last several days of use. Earbuds tend to be lucky to last an hour; indeed they're so bad that the specs for them almost always include multiple charges from the charging case when making claims about run time. I wouldn't be at all surpised that earbuds could come close in performance at a much lower cost, but they'd be virtually useless in terms of actual use because you'll hardly get any actual use out of them.
Impaired hearing does not mean you cannot hear.
Try a mix of very sensitive at some frequencies with tinnitus.
I can hear things no one else in the family can hear, but cannot understand voices on TV when the audio compression is OTT.
ITV on Freesat is particularly terrible, my wife watches some daytime junk and quite often I cannot tell what they are saying. Luckily most ITV programming is shit.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
