Assisted hearing options

[Marineboy63]

We currently have an IR system which is never used. Our audience (mostly elderly) hate using it. It's faffy to use, confuses older patrons and it singles them out as hard of hearing. We are often asked why the loop isn't on. (we don't have one) but we have a member of staff who uses hearing aids and her aids don't link to a loop anyway.

 

So, app based solutions are no good for an audience who wouldn't know a smart phone from a Star Trek Communicator. Loops don't work with some modern hearing aids and IR /RF systems are clunky and embarrassing.

What's going into new builds and is there any official advice from Hearing support organisations?

Thanks in advance.

[sandall]

Loops don't work with some modern hearing aids

That's news to me. AFAIK they all have a "T" setting or equivalent (usually Option 4 on current NHS aids).

 

IR /RF systems are clunky and embarrassing

What system do you have & what makes it faffy to use? Our theatre has been using a Sennheiser IR system with stethoscopes for decades & the hard of hearing patrons all seem happy with it.

 

E2A: Have you looked at the RNID website?

 

 

Edited September 9, 2019 by sandall

[timsabre]

Loops don't work with some modern hearing aids

That's news to me. AFAIK they all have a "T" setting or equivalent (usually Option 4 on current NHS aids).

Yes, I think it would be more accurate to say "a lot of people don't know how to switch their hearing aid to loop mode". Including some hearing aid providers apparently. It's not as easy as the little slide switch they used to have.

 

[J Pearce]

Some of the new mini hearing aids don't have a T loop option as they are not physically big enough to contain enough coil to receive the signal. These types are not usually issued by the NHS, but by private providers.

[sandall]

Presumably for those with deep pockets, & where vanity trumps functionality ?

[Simon Lewis]

Presumably for those with deep pockets, & where vanity trumps functionality ?

 

Absolutely.

 

If the wearer has a behind the ear aid, it's fairly likely it has or can be programmed to have a working telecoil. However, there is a tendency for some NHS audiologists not to allocate the loop as one of the programme options when fitting the aid. If the user doesn't know the benefits, they might even say ' no ' if asked. As OP's aid wearers will attest, loop based systems are still the most popular amongst users in this country.

 

Infra red can work very well (unless it's the Phonic Ear PE602R headset receiver which doesn't really work well with telecoils and exerts so much force on the ear that users complain of pain and discomfort after a few minutes). IR receivers do need charging, issuing and retrieving, though, and require the user to wear them (and somethings fiddle with the neck loop position to get enough gain). Stethoscope based listeners are OK for those with moderate hearing loss, but, aren't too good for greater losses. FM based systems share similar characteristics as IRs, except they can be less private.

The new wave of technologies promise much, but Bluetooth isn't a protocol available on NHS aids (AFAIK) and will exhibit latency, and the BYOD voice over IP app based systems will also have platform dependent latency and a need for a charged smart phone with suitable adaptor to allow signal to be heard directly at the aid.

 

For the OP - I would see if a loop can be installed (subject to the usual design constraints). Otherwise, you have cons with any of the common systems...

[Bryson]

Take with a grain of salt as I work in Canada - current practice may differ in the UK - I haven't worked there for 10 or so years:

 

We design in RF systems, most usually. Listen Technologies or Williams Sound. That comes with the full set of accessories (neck loops, earsets, headphones and so on.). Rarely, but sometimes, we put in a full hearing assistance loop, and occasionally we'll put in a secondary wi-fi, BYOD system as well.

 

BUT: Mostly we do all that because it is required by law here...but hearing aids are a LOT better than they used to be, and we frequently hear: "Why did you make us buy all that hearing assistance stuff? No-one ever wants it...."

[djw1981]

Presumably for those with deep pockets, & where vanity trumps functionality ?

 

Absolutely.

 

If the wearer has a behind the ear aid, it's fairly likely it has or can be programmed to have a working telecoil. However, there is a tendency for some NHS audiologists not to allocate the loop as one of the programme options when fitting the aid. If the user doesn't know the benefits, they might even say ' no ' if asked. As OP's aid wearers will attest, loop based systems are still the most popular amongst users in this country.

 

Which is ironic given that more and more both hospital reception desks and NHS consultation rooms come with the portable desktop loop devices to assist patients to hear what is being said.

We have been assured that there is little spill out of the room with these, though many of us are a little skeptical.

[Jivemaster]

Certainly the hospital that employs me uses induction loop to the exclusion of all other systems.

[ninjadingle]

We are still installing loops in our lecture theatres, although we prefer the minimal spill, tape under the carpet design rather than the traditional cable round the room approach. However this requires a lot of co-ordination between the installers and other trades, such as carpet fitters and seat companies. Once they're in the work brilliantly, but installation is a nightmare!

 

Considered IR but as it identifies the student as having a disability we've disregarded it, along with the mentioned management needed which we simply cannot provide.

And I can say with certainty that NHS issued hearing aids are compatible with loops. It's how I set them up and test them! ?

[sandall]

If the wearer has a behind the ear aid, it's fairly likely it has or can be programmed to have a working telecoil. However, there is a tendency for some NHS audiologists not to allocate the loop as one of the programme options when fitting the aid. If the user doesn't know the benefits, they might even say ' no ' if asked.

Funnily enough I had a follow-up to a hearing test yesterday. The young audiologist hung a pendant thingy round my neck which downloaded how I'd been using my aids (not nearly enough for her liking) since they were last re-programmed. As I had only clicked on the no-compression setting by mistake, & hadn't used the loop setting at all, she was quite keen to remove them, as I obviously couldn't cope with all that choice.... A no doubt well-meaning offer, but one I managed to decline.

[Simon Lewis]

We have been assured that there is little spill out of the room with these, though many of us are a little skeptical.

 

Those units have only a very small loop (the size of the unit) with a relatively low current flowing through. Spill could be an issue, but it's nowhere near as likely as a larger perimeter system.

The coverage pattern for table top and counter style loops can be slightly problematic and dependent upon orientation. Properly installed, positioned and maintained, counter type systems can be very useful. However, the vast majority are not and are often useless.

Table top systems usually have the microphone built in, but in use, the talker can be almost as far away from the unit as the talker is to the listener. This actually defeats much of the benefit of an ALS in having a better signal to noise ratio. In fact, ANY assisted listening system that doesn't get a mic close to the talker (and yes - that means mics on the board room ceilings, boundary mics on the wall behind lecture theatre podiums and mics hanging in the grid of theatres) is likely to provide a much less than optimal signal to noise ratio and in many cases the ALS signal is actually worse than not using the ALS at all.

 

It's time that installers and distributors took note... ;-)

 

Funnily enough I had a follow-up to a hearing test yesterday. The young audiologist hung a pendant thingy round my neck which downloaded how I'd been using my aids (not nearly enough for her liking) since they were last re-programmed. As I had only clicked on the no-compression setting by mistake, & hadn't used the loop setting at all, she was quite keen to remove them, as I obviously couldn't cope with all that choice.... A no doubt well-meaning offer, but one I managed to decline.

 

If you have any understanding and experience of audio system design and operation, I very strongly suspect you would actively avoid the compression setting

[sunray]

We have been assured that there is little spill out of the room with these, though many of us are a little skeptical.

Those units have only a very small loop (the size of the unit) with a relatively low current flowing through. Spill could be an issue, but it's nowhere near as likely as a larger perimeter system.

The coverage pattern for table top and counter style loops can be slightly problematic and dependent upon orientation. Properly installed, positioned and maintained, counter type systems can be very useful. However, the vast majority are not and are often useless.

Table top systems usually have the microphone built in, but in use, the talker can be almost as far away from the unit as the talker is to the listener. This actually defeats much of the benefit of an ALS in having a better signal to noise ratio. In fact, ANY assisted listening system that doesn't get a mic close to the talker (and yes - that means mics on the board room ceilings, boundary mics on the wall behind lecture theatre podiums and mics hanging in the grid of theatres) is likely to provide a much less than optimal signal to noise ratio and in many cases the ALS signal is actually worse than not using the ALS at all.

 

It's time that installers and distributors took note... ;-)

I do have to agree with most of this and try to checkout the AFILS if I can. If I'm adding audio into the venue, I often find I change the microphone arrangement.On one horrible system it was a boundry mic on the back of the proc wall about 3ft above the stage and most of theloop sound was foot fall noise, especially during scene change when a few expletives were also heard from behind the curtain.

 

Funnily enough I had a follow-up to a hearing test yesterday. The young audiologist hung a pendant thingy round my neck which downloaded how I'd been using my aids (not nearly enough for her liking) since they were last re-programmed. As I had only clicked on the no-compression setting by mistake, & hadn't used the loop setting at all, she was quite keen to remove them, as I obviously couldn't cope with all that choice.... A no doubt well-meaning offer, but one I managed to decline.

If you have any understanding and experience of audio system design and operation, I very strongly suspect you would actively avoid the compression setting

My fiancee and my father in law both wear 2 aids and the 'standard' setting is compressed, at my suggestion they have both tried 'non compressed' when using AFILS, it's OK, the majority of the time they cannot cope with the wide variations of level.my systems are of course perfect

[sandall]

If you have any understanding and experience of audio system design and operation, I very strongly suspect you would actively avoid the compression setting :)

(Been doing both for over 40 years, so yes I do have a bit :)).

Basically I only use aids for watching TV, especially drama (but let's not get into "mumblegate") & talks / lectures, where either the PA or the voices aren't up to the task, for which all the processing really helps, as does the "directional" setting in noisy-background areas (TBF the loop systems I've met in lecture theatres have usually worked well if the PA does, but I usually forget to check). The frequency-compensated but otherwise unprocessed "music" setting is there as a check on what I'm inflicting on the audience when balancing live performances. Like AGC on recording devices, the compression, etc. does the job when clarity rather than fidelity is the target.

Edited September 11, 2019 by sandall