upgrade to nucleus 5

T

tinan

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2009
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
was implanted with Nucleus freedom 3 years ago and now looking into upgrading to Nucleus 5. It is awful expensive and pondering whether there really are great improvements - the ads sounds like it, but..... Anyone out there with experience in upgrading? Is the 5 really much better???
 
I too have been looking for an unbiased opinion due to the high cost.
I would love to give it a 15-30 day trial just to see how much different it is.
I think there is a trial period but it is still a lot of $$$.

For me, I'm mostly interested in the additional water resistance ratings.
I would love to help my 2 yr old with swimming lessons and be able to hear her. With the Freedom, I'm a little nervous being in and around water.
 
RonJaxon got his Nucleus 5. He will answer your question.
 
Hard tho cuz ronjaxon has only had the N5 and didn't upgrade so he can't compare the freedom to the N5
 
I currently wear a Nucleus Freedom and have just traded in my spare processor for a N5. I will let everyone know how it goes.

Thanks for sharing the link Faire Jour. I hope I have a better experience and it is nice to be warned. My audi mentioned about either the auto phone or the auto off being a problem. I think I can predict an extra visit to the audi coming up.

I just hope the processor I am using now holds up until I get the N5.
 
the N5 is just a repackaged version of the Freedom it sounds like.. just slimmer and sleeker looking, with only a slight improvement when to their speech processing strategies. I wouldn't even consider upgrading from the Freedom myself, just from what I've heard.

I myself don't have an implant yet, but when I do get one, I'll be getting Advanced Bionics, not Cochlear.
 
cdmeggers said:
the N5 is just a repackaged version of the Freedom it sounds like.. just slimmer and sleeker looking, with only a slight improvement when to their speech processing strategies. I wouldn't even consider upgrading from the Freedom myself, just from what I've heard.

I myself don't have an implant yet, but when I do get one, I'll be getting Advanced Bionics, not Cochlear.
Click to expand...

Most people who use Cochlear use the speech processing ACE or SPEAK. Those are the same stragies that were used in 1990's. There has been no software update since then....:hmm: That is one of the major reasons we went with AB. I don't want a "nicer" processor, I want better hearing and updated software.
 
faire_jour said:
Most people who use Cochlear use the speech processing ACE or SPEAK. Those are the same stragies that were used in 1990's. There has been no software update since then....:hmm: That is one of the major reasons we went with AB. I don't want a "nicer" processor, I want better hearing and updated software.
Click to expand...

This statement is incorrect. Cochlear releases updated versions of ACE, SPEAK and CIS coding strategies. Again, Cochlear has no reason to introduce any new coding strategy for 3G, Freedom, N5 and any future generation processors because the ACE and SPEAK had proven success over many years and wants to improvise on it.

This is the information I got after I raised a question whlist I toured in Cochlear manufacturing facility in Lane Cove, NSW Australia.
 
faire_jour said:
Most people who use Cochlear use the speech processing ACE or SPEAK. Those are the same stragies that were used in 1990's. There has been no software update since then....:hmm: That is one of the major reasons we went with AB. I don't want a "nicer" processor, I want better hearing and updated software.
Click to expand...

ACE and SPEAK have been proven to be effective in the literature, however the same is not yet true of newer strategies by Med-EL and Advanced bionics. I know that FSP from Med-EL is based around the older CIS strategy which provides considerably poorer results than the ACE and SPEAK strategies, although just how effective FSP is remains to be seen. As for the Advanced Bionics strategies, I have found very little information regarding how they work and outcomes with their devices that I am cautious to offer any opinion at all.

A major problem with hearing-aid manufacturers is that they keep advancing their technologies without proving that they offer the benefits claimed. I see the same strategy at Advanced Bionics. Med-El and Cochlear appear to be taking a more transparent route, focusing on ensuring device reliability and documenting a history of good outcomes with incremental upgrades to proven strategies.

The major difficulty with all new strategies is that they are compared to the CIS strategy, the only common strategy across devices. In addition, the design of each device is significantly different enough that it is difficult to tell whether improvements beyond this are related to device or strategy. Indeed, many improvements with newer generations of Nucleus devices are to do with hardware improvements that allow a better perception of information using the same strategies.
 
Back
Top