Just took an elderly relative to an audiologist (USA) to try out hearing aids. To set up a demo the audiologist referred to the results of a recent hearing test and then used a fist-sized interface that talked to a Windows box by Bluetooth and to the high-end hearing aids by some unknown wireless method. Looking at the product literature, there is also a customer version of this interface that can be controlled through a smart phone--to change between modes, for example, "quiet room" and "noisy restaurant" (but not for detailed programming).
It was hinted that (at least for some brands), the low-end or mid-range models are the same as the high-end models, but with some of the advanced features turned off in software.
Does anyone here know more about the hearing aid business? It seems to be full of trade secrets and security through obscurity. Based on comments from other hearing aid users over the years, there are a lot of unhappy customers. My state now has a mandatory 45 day trial period which seems like a good piece of regulation--it takes time to see if you can adapt to a particular hearing aid.
A quick web search turned up some forum chatter about these topics, but no one seems to have jail broken their hearing aids yet. These high end ones were quoted at USD $5600/pair, with a mid-priced version (less features) for $3400/pair -- maybe the high price scares would-be hackers/crackers away?
http://www.audiologyforum.net/forum/index.php?topic=67.0
http://www.hearingaidforums.com/showthread.php?18282-New-Aid-Wearer-Software-Engineer-Hack-my-hearing-aid&highlight=hack
https://thecookiebitechronicles.wordpress.com/tag/hearing-aid-hacking/
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Saturday November 28 2015, @06:55PM
Can you insert sounds?
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @10:34PM
From the hearingaidforums.com thread:
Apple has a proprietary protocol that allows the hearing aids to stream music
Imagine the possibilities!
~$ while true; do cat > /dev/hearing-aid < loud-airhorn.wav; done
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @07:04PM
1) No one wants to hack a medical device they require for communication if it would potentially leave them without it. I have a Phonak top of the line HA that is about 2 years old and it cost 3600 dollars. I would not want to destroy it by screwing around with it. Same thing for my implant speech processor -- it literally costs about 9700 dollars to replace. Unless I was extremely wealthy, I wouldn't be fucking with them, and those that are rich can just afford the high end devices.
2) The programming tools required are quite pricey. You can find them on ebay for about $600 last time I checked, and you also have to buy the software, which is about $200 for what appears to be a cracked version of the SW on ebay. You cannot acquire a real license or the hardware on your own without being an audiology professional.
3) The advanced features really don't matter that much. There's windblock and some other linked crap that requires 2 HAs and is kind of annoying, as in automatically having the phone broadcast to both HAs when you put it up to your ear. This can be useful but it's also annoying as it kills the mic on the other HA so all you hear is the phone call.
4) You're much better off building your own hearing aid with integrated amplifier so you can write your own software than deal with all this proprietary software.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @11:52PM
4) You're much better off building your own hearing aid with integrated amplifier so you can write your own software than deal with all this proprietary software.
Yep. Avoid giving money to these predatory proprietary software companies. They'll lock you in, abuse you, and use you for all you're worth. I don't like having masters, so I use freedom software.
(Score: 5, Informative) by frojack on Saturday November 28 2015, @07:35PM
The price of hearing aids expands to consume all available insurance coverage, and then some. Prices have always been high, but new technology should have them plummeting by now. Instead they still rise, and they are still poor performers. It is one of the most patent encrusted industries there is, and the phrase "in a hearing aid" is almost as ubiquitous as "with a computer".
In the mean time there are at least half a dozen crowd sourced bluetooth earbud projects that have equipment just as small, and only lacking a microphone.
Why risk a $5000 device when you could hack a mic into an earbud?
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/phazon-wireless-earbuds-guaranteed-not-to-fall#/ [indiegogo.com]
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/dot-world-s-smallest-bluetooth-headset#/ [indiegogo.com]
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/gogo-s-wireless-waterproof-sports-earbuds#/ [indiegogo.com]
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/truebuds-the-smallest-stereo-cordless-earbuds#/ [indiegogo.com]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @08:38PM
It isn't just hearing aids. Any device for any disability is outrageously overpriced. They are for a "captive" audience and they can and do charge whatever they want.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @10:48PM
That's the downside of medical regulation. Comprehensive test coverage is expensive to do. That creates a barrier to entry that can be exploited.
But consider what can go wrong, even with hearing aids - we've all heard a computer crash in the middle of playing audio and produce an ear-splitting shriek of noise on a loop. Imagine that happening with a hearing aid - even a short blast could further damage the user's hearing. Now imagine that happening to an 80-year old who doesn't have the mobility or dexterity to quickly remove the hearing aid when it goes on blast - they might be exposed to it for minutes or even hours if no one is around to help them.
I'm all for someone developing open-source bluetooth earbuds that just happen to have high-speed DSPs and high-quality microphones on the outside for "noise-cancellation" - but it is also important that people who aren't capable of dealing with the inevitable bugs not use them blindly either.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @05:35PM
But this reasoning doesn't apply to something like a walker, where the brake cable is three times the price of the _same_ product at a bike shop.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @10:11PM
Of course it does. the bike manufacturer only has to make someone whole by paying in a lawsuit. The walker must meet a higher standards -- it shouldn't even get to the point where there is a lawsuit.
(Score: 2) by Max Hyre on Saturday November 28 2015, @08:31PM
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @08:43PM
> No hearing aid can give you your hearing back. It can only do its best with what you have.
However the best that computationally expensive algorithms can do is a very impressive. Like recognizing human speech and pitch-shifting it to the nearest frequency range that is not damaged for that particular wearer.
(Score: 2) by Max Hyre on Monday November 30 2015, @11:12PM
Thanks, this is great news. I'll have to go back and check it out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @12:21AM
Wait for a stem cell based cure.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @11:36PM
>a fist-sized interface that talked to a Windows box by Bluetooth and to the high-end hearing aids by some unknown wireless method.
Could that have been....soundwaves?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @01:06AM
>> a fist-sized interface that talked to a Windows box by Bluetooth and to the high-end hearing aids by some unknown wireless method.
> Could that have been....soundwaves?
Another possibility, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_low_energy [wikipedia.org] so that data can go both ways?