Tech
I Have Hearing Loss. These Are the Hearing Aids I Recommend
Compare the Best Hearing Aids
How Much Do Hearing Aids Cost?
How much money should you expect to spend on a hearing aid? The answer depends primarily on whether you’re looking into over-the-counter or prescription hearing aids. Unsurprisingly, the latter is a wallet guzzler, with average costs between $2,000 to $8,000. But OTCs can ring up quite a tab in their own right, and our most highly rated devices will still run you about $800 to $2,000 a pair. So far, we haven’t found an OTC device under this $800 price that is truly effective at treating hearing loss. In most cases, the $100 budget devices now flooding the market are too good to be true.
Fortunately, there are several methods to manage the high cost of a hearing aid:
Financing is available for virtually all reputable hearing aid companies, so you may not need to pay everything up front. Some plans are offered directly through the company, while others may require a third-party financing company like Klarna or Care Credit.
If you are over the age of 65, you may qualify for an add-on Medicare Advantage Plan (Part C) that may include hearing-related benefits. Most private insurance providers don’t offer hearing exam and device coverage, though some may have the option to add it as a supplemental benefit.
Medicaid coverage in certain states also pays for hearing aids, provided the prescription brand accepts it. Veterans may also qualify for hearing aid coverage through their VA benefits.
Some state governments have programs to help their constituents front the costs of hearing aids. Call or write to your state department to see whether this is a service they offer.
About Medicare and Insurance
Much like how it does not cover eyeglasses, Medicare does not cover hearing aids. That said, supplemental plans may include hearing benefits: Medicare Advantage Part C plans and many private insurance plans offer some hearing support, but coverage varies widely, so check with your provider before making that appointment. (Many states mandate that private insurance plans cover hearing aids, but a number of these are restricted to coverage for children.) On the plus side, standard Medicare plans (Parts A and B) do cover the cost of a hearing exam, but only with a doctor’s referral.
Many hearing aid providers are now providing financing for their products, usually at very low interest rates that let you pay for the product over up to three years. Medicaid may also help offset the cost of hearing aids, as may employer FSA and HSA plans.
How to Buy a Hearing Aid
There are two primary ways to buy a hearing aid: through a medical professional (the prescription route) or over-the-counter. Each has its pros and cons.
Prescription hearing aids are usually acquired through an audiologist. These specialists operate businesses ranging from sophisticated medical centers to small shops in a strip mall, usually emblazoned with a sign that reads “HEARING AIDS.” Again, this was the only way to acquire a hearing aid before 2022. An audiologist provides full service for your hearing aid from start to finish. They will test your hearing in a specialized room, physically examine your ears for medical problems, and suggest a hearing aid model. They will tune your chosen hearing aids and adjust them over time if things don’t sound right. The catch? Prescription hearing aids are expensive, anywhere from two to 10 times costlier than over-the-counter models. That said, for consumers who need hand-holding and significant fine-tuning of their hearing aids, professionals like this still have a function.
Over-the-counter aids can be bought through retailers online or offline, just like you would buy, say, a laptop computer. Different vendors offer different levels of presales support, and as the price of an OTC hearing aid goes up, you can usually expect a higher level of service. This may start with an online hearing test delivered to you via your computer or phone; these are not as good as an in-person test, but some can be surprisingly accurate. You may also get access to a remote audiologist who can meet with you over a video chat and fine-tune your hearing aid settings over the air. Ultimately, higher-end OTC aids offer a user experience similar to that of prescription aids, only one that is fully remote. At the low end of the hearing aid spectrum, you may get no service and support at all.
What Are the Different Types of Hearing Loss?
Medically speaking, there are three types of hearing loss. These are:
- Conductive: Hearing loss related to the outer or middle ear.
- Sensorineural: Hearing loss related to the inner ear.
- Mixed: A combination of both.
All of these types of hearing loss can occur due to a variety of factors. Genetics and aging are two of the biggest and most universal: The older you get, the more the sensitive organs inside your ears begin to break down, and this can happen especially early and/or rapidly if you have a family history of hearing loss. The other all-too-common cause for hearing loss is exposure to loud noises, and it doesn’t take much. Many people exposed to prolonged, loud noises like concerts, industrial equipment, motorcycle engines, and sirens experience a gradual hearing loss due to the slow death of tiny hair cells in the inner ear. However, sudden exposure to very loud sounds like explosions and gunshots can cause instantaneous, irreversible damage by rupturing the eardrum (or worse).
There’s no easy way to know which type of hearing loss you have unless you’ve experienced some type of acute damage that has brought on a sudden change in your hearing. Whatever you suspect, it’s important you see a medical doctor to diagnose the issue fully.
Sensorineural is the most common type of hearing loss, and it can be caused by any of the aforementioned issues and more. Sensorineural hearing loss is permanent and can not be reversed, but it can be alleviated through the use of hearing aids. An audiologist can develop an audiogram for you that will show you how severe your hearing loss is and advise on what types of hearing aids might be best for treating it.
Conversely, conductive hearing loss is more medically treatable. This type of hearing loss is often due to a physical obstruction such as a buildup of earwax or fluid, or even physical damage to the eardrum. In these cases, a physician must examine the ear to determine the best course of treatment.
Degrees of Hearing Loss
The primary levels of hearing loss look like this, as defined by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA):
I configured and qualitatively tested each device in several settings, including my home, outdoors, and crowded environments, to see how well they helped treat my mild hearing loss while more deeply evaluating the user experience. I tried charging rechargeable models, changing batteries if disposable, connecting Bluetooth features, and cleaning the devices. I also compared them based on overall look and style—style matters.
Other Hearing Aids to Consider
We’ve reviewed dozens of hearing aids, and many of them are good but not great. Here are alternatives to consider:
GN ReSound Vivia for $5,000+: ReSound’s new Vivia line of prescription hearing aids are on par in both design (at a svelte 2.56 grams) and quality with the Starkey Edge AI models, providing a pristine audio experience that is tuned perfectly and utterly free of hiss and feedback. The “intelligence-augmented” devices work well in either noise or more intimate one-on-one settings, and GN’s Smart 3D app couldn’t be easier to master. Support for Bluetooth Auracast is also included, so wearers can now pipe media (like the audio from the TV at a bar) directly to the aids. They aren’t cheap, so getting some advance ears-on time with them is essential for prospective buyers.
Phonak Virto R Infinio for $4,000: Phonak’s Virto R Infinio (8/10, WIRED Recommends) and pricey prescription hearing aids like the GN ReSound above, but they have a custom fit process that helps make them some of the best-fitting hearing aids on the market. They’re immensely comfortable to wear for long periods, and you’ll get pretty good audio quality for in-the-ear hearing aids. It’s just a shame there’s no battery in the charging case to extend the run time.
Sony CRE-E10 for $898: The CRE-E10 (7/10, WIRED Review) aren’t so much of an upgrade to the C20 we recommend above, but a different class of product. They’re much more visible, though they look like a standard pair of Bluetooth earbuds. The E10 provide a comfortable fit but can get tiring after a long day. At least they use a rechargeable battery (via USB-C) with up to 26 hours on a single charge. You can control them only through Sony’s app, and the hearing test lets you tune the frequency response of the aids. The audio experience is excellent at low volumes, though these aids have a bit of an echo and some additional noise. Still, I found it manageable. They do a decent job streaming media and calls via Bluetooth.
Eargo 8 for $2,499: The Eargo 8 (6/10, WIRED Review) offer high-quality sound in a tiny package that’s nearly invisible. There are a few listening programs you can cycle through, but I didn’t find the need to switch modes—they provided well-amplified audio no matter what I was doing. Battery life is excellent, but the poor app control functions and lack of Bluetooth streaming make them a tough sell, especially considering the absurdly high price. That’s almost the same problem I had with their predecessor, the Eargo 7 (7/10, WIRED Review).
Audien Hearing Atom X for $389: The most interesting feature of Audien’s Atom X (6/10, WIRED Review) is the case—there’s an embedded display that lets you tweak volume and change modes, no need to use an app or fuss with buttons. Audien has also reduced the hiss from these affordable buds. Unfortunately, the hearing aids aren’t tunable and provide blunt amplification, so you can’t shape the frequencies to where you need the most help. I suggest trying a pair of AirPods Pro 3 first.
Avoid These Hearing Aids
Just as important as what hearing aids to buy are what hearing aids not to buy. While some of these devices are affordable, most are lacking in quality or style. After our testing, we don’t wholly recommend these hearing aids. (Poor hearing aids can harm your hearing.)
Audien Atom One for $98: I had high hopes for these, but they’re impossibly cheap. The Atom One (5/10, WIRED Review) come up short on smart features, as there’s no way to fine-tune these devices.
Elehear Beyond Pro for $599: There are improvements here in audio quality over the older Elehear Beyond, but the core problem with the Beyond Pro (6/10, WIRED Review) hearing aids is that they’re just too bulky and uncomfortable to wear. They also come with a price hike that’s tough to swallow.
Lexie Lumen for $299: These are comically large and dated. The case was physically falling apart during testing, which I wouldn’t expect from hearing aids at this price. Though they sound fine, they’re far from subtle and were plagued with connectivity bugs.
Olive Union Olive Max for $447: The Olive Max (6/10, WIRED Review) are big and look like a Bluetooth headset from the early 2000s (except for both of your ears). You can use an app to fine-tune the listening experience, but the overall hearing aid performance was mixed, and I experienced a steady, buzzing background noise. They were pretty unusable in loud environments, too. That said, they work well as standard wireless earbuds.
Ceretone Core One for $350: The mandatory app required to control the Ceretone Core One (5/10, WIRED Review) hearing aids is so basic that it’s useless. You can’t tune the frequencies, and the listening experience is quite blunt. They’re also not comfortable to wear for long periods.
Ceretone Core One Pro for $390: The Core One Pro (5/10, WIRED Review) change things up so much that they’re no longer compatible with Ceretone’s app. Instead, you’ll control them through the buttons on the case. Unfortunately, you still can’t tune them to an audiogram, so they amplify everything bluntly, and they’re not very effective as hearing aids.
MDHearing Neo for $297 and Neo XS for $297: Never mind the Joe Namath endorsement, these in-ear aids are incredibly uncomfortable and feature a wildly dated design sensibility. Screeching feedback at the slightest touch makes them untenable for even short-term use.
Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that’s too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.
Tech
It took 40 years for technology to catch up to this zipper design
In 1985, the Innovative Design Fund placed an ad in Scientific American offering up to $10,000 to support clever prototypes for clothing, home decor, and textiles. William Freeman PhD ’92, then an electrical engineer at Polaroid and now an MIT professor, saw it and submitted a novel idea: a three-sided zipper. Instead of fastening pants, it’d be like a switch that seamlessly flips chairs, tents, and purses between soft and rigid states, making them easier to pack and put together.
Freeman’s blueprint was much like a regular zipper, except triangular. On each side, he nailed a belt to connect narrow wooden “teeth” together. A slider wrapping around the device could be moved up to fasten the three strips into place, straightening them into a triangular tube. His proposal was rejected, but Freeman patented his prototype and stored it in his garage in the hopes it might come in handy one day.
Nearly 40 years later, MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) researchers wanted to revive the project to create items with “tunable stiffness.” Prior attempts to adjust that weren’t easily reversible or required manual assembly, so CSAIL built an automated design tool and adaptable fastener called the “Y-zipper.” The scientists’ software program helps users customize three-sided zippers, which it then builds on its own in a 3D printer using plastics. These devices can be attached or embedded into camping equipment, medical gear, robots, and art installations for more convenient assembly.
“A regular zipper is great for closing up flat objects, like a jacket, but Freeman ideated something more dynamic. Using current fabrication technology, his mechanism can transform more complex items,” says MIT postdoc and CSAIL researcher Jiaji Li, who is a lead author on an open-access paper presenting the project. “We’ve developed a process that builds objects you can rapidly shift from flexible to rigid, and you can be confident they’ll work in the real world.”
Why zippers?
Users can customize how the fasteners look when they’re zipped up in CSAIL’s software program; they can select the length of each strip, as well as the direction and angle at which they’ll bend. They can also choose from one of four motion “primitives” to select how the zipper will appear when it’s zipped up: straight, bent (similar to an arch), coiled (resembling a spring), or twisted (looks like screws).
The Y-zipper that results will appear to “shape-shift” in the real world. When unzipped, it can look like a squid with three sprawling tentacles, and when you close it up, it becomes a more compact structure (like a rod, for instance). This flexibility could be useful when you’re traveling — take pitching a tent, for example. The process can take up to six minutes to do alone, but with the Y-zipper’s help, it can be done in one minute and 20 seconds. You simply attach each arm to a side of the tent, supporting the structure from the top so that the zipper seemingly pops the canopy into place.
This seamless transition could also unlock more flexible wearables, often useful in medical scenarios. The team wrapped the Y-zipper around a wrist cast, so that a user could loosen it during the day, and zip it up at night to prevent further injuries. In turn, a seemingly stiff device can be made more comfortable, adjusting to a patient’s needs.
The system can also aid users in crafting technology that moves at the push of a button. One can attach a motor to the Y-zipper after fabrication to automate the zipping process, which helps build things like an adaptive robotic quadruped. The robot could potentially change the size of its legs, tightening up into taller limbs and unzipping when it needs to be lower to the ground. Eventually, such rapid adjustments could help the robot explore the uneven terrain of places like canyons or forests. Actuated Y-zippers can also build dynamic art installations — for example, the team created a long, winding flower that “bloomed” thanks to a static motor zipping up the device.
Mastering the material
While Li and his colleagues saw the creative potential of the Y-zipper, it wasn’t yet clear how durable it would be. Could they sustain daily use?
The team ran a series of stress tests to find out. First, they evaluated the strength and flexibility of polylactic acid (PLA) and thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU), two plastics commonly used in 3D printing. Using a machine that bent the Y-zippers down, they found that PLA could handle heavier loads, while TPU was more pliable.
In another experiment, CSAIL researchers used an actuator to continuously open and close the Y-zipper to see how long it’d take to snap. Some 18,000 cycles of zipping and unzipping later, they finally broke. Y-zipper’s secret to durability, according to 3D simulations: its elastic structure, which helps distribute the stress of heavy loads.
Despite these findings, Li envisions an even more durable three-sided zipper using stronger materials, like metal. They may also make the zippers bigger for larger-scale projects, but that’s not yet possible with their current 3D printing platform.
Jiaji also notes that some applications remain unexplored, like space exploration, wherein Y-zipper’s tentacles could be built into a spacecraft to grab nearby rock samples. Likewise, the zippers could be embedded into structures that can be assembled rapidly, helping relief workers quickly set up shelters or medical tents during natural disasters and rescues.
“Reimagining an everyday zipper to tackle 3D morphological transitions is a brilliant approach to dynamic assembly,” says Zhejiang University assistant professor Guanyun Wang, who wasn’t involved in the paper. “More importantly, it effectively bridges the gap between soft and rigid states, offering a highly scalable and innovative fabrication approach that will greatly benefit the future design of embodied intelligence.”
Li and Freeman wrote the paper with Tianjin University PhD student Xiang Chang and MIT CSAIL colleagues: PhD student Maxine Perroni-Scharf; undergraduate Dingning Cao; recent visiting researchers Mingming Li (Zhejiang University), Jeremy Mrzyglocki (Technical University of Munich), and Takumi Yamamoto (Keio University); and MIT Associate Professor Stefanie Mueller, who is a CSAIL principal investigator and senior author on the work. Their research was supported, in part, by a postdoctoral research fellowship from Zhejiang University and the MIT-GIST Program.
The researchers’ work was presented at the ACM’s Computer-Human Interaction (CHI) conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems in April.
Tech
DHS Demanded Google Surrender Data on Canadian’s Activity, Location Over Anti-ICE Posts
The Department of Homeland Security tried to obtain a Canadian man’s location information, activity logs, and other identifying information from Google after he criticized the Trump administration online following the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis early this year.
Lawyers for the man, who has not been named, are alarmed in part because they say that the man has not entered the United States in more than a decade. “I don’t know what the government knows about our client’s residence, but it’s clear that the government isn’t stopping to find out,” says Michael Perloff, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia who is representing the man in a lawsuit against Markwayne Mullin, the secretary of DHS, over the summons. The lawsuit alleges that DHS violated the customs law that gives the agency the power to request records from businesses and other parties.
Perloff argues that the government is using the fact that big tech companies are based in the US to request information it would not otherwise be able to get. “It’s using that geographic fact to get information that otherwise would be totally outside of its jurisdiction,” he says. “I mean, we’re talking about the physical movements of a person who lives in Canada.”
DHS and Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The demand for the man’s location data was included in a request DHS issued to Google called a customs summons, which is supposed to be used to investigate issues related to importing goods and collecting customs duties.
“It says right in the statute, it’s for records and testimony about the correctness of an entry, the liability of a person for duties, taxes, and fees, you know, compliance with basic customs laws,” says Chris Duncan, a former assistant chief counsel for US Customs and Border Protection who now works as a private-practice attorney representing importers and exporters. “And that’s all it was ever envisioned to be used for.”
A customs summons is a type of administrative subpoena and is not reviewed by a judge or grand jury before being sent out. According to the complaint, Google alerted the man about the request on February 9, despite an ask included in the summons “not to disclose the existence of this summons for an indefinite period of time.”
Through his attorneys, the man told WIRED he initially mistook the notification for a joke or scam before realizing it was real.
The summons, which is included in the complaint, does not give a specific reason for why the man was under investigation beyond citing the Tariff Act of 1930. The man’s lawyers contend that he did not export or import anything from the United States between September 1, 2025, to February 4, 2026, the time frame the government requested information about.
Instead, the man’s lawyers allege, the summons was filed in response to the man’s online activities, including posts that he made condemning immigration enforcement agents after the killings of Good and Pretti in January.
The man tells WIRED that watching members of the Trump administration “smear these two souls as terrorists was absolutely disgusting and enraging. People were being asked to disbelieve our own eyes so that the men responsible for killing two good Americans would go free.”
The man says of his online activity, “I felt I needed to do something that would stand out and be seen by despairing Americans to show them they had support and that they were not alone.”
Tech
Do Lightsaber Blades Have Mass?
When you think of Star Wars, you think of lightsabers. Right? What could be better, from a movie-making standpoint, than a futuristic sword that lets you create awesome fencing duels like in old-time Errol Flynn swashbucklers. (So much better than watching Stormtroopers fire their blasters into walls and ceilings and anything else except their targets.)
Lightsabers come in a cosmic rainbow of hues (color-coded blue or green for good guys, red for bad) and a variety of shapes. There’s even a double-bladed version in Phantom Menace. (I don’t want to start a nerd fight—yet—but the best lightsaber battle in the canon has to be the “Duel of the Fates” in that movie, thanks to the skills and scariness of Darth Maul actor Ray Park.)
So … exactly what are lightsabers? Of course, they aren’t real, so nobody really knows how they work. Even the characters in the movies seem a little confused about it. In Phantom Menace, Anakin calls it a “laser sword.” Yeah, he was a kid, but both Din Djarin (the Mandalorian) and Luke Skywalker also refer to it as a laser sword—though I suspect Luke was being sarcastic.
Anyway, that’s just wrong: It can’t be a laser. For starters, lasers beams are invisible from the side, so you wouldn’t see a thing unless you staged the duels in a disco with fog machines to scatter the beams. Second, the beams go on forever; they don’t have an end. Third, laser beams can’t clank together like swords—they’d just pass through each other when you try to parry.
But what is it then? We can greatly narrow the possibilities by asking if the blade has mass. If it’s some kind of light (as you’d think from the name “lightsaber”), then the answer is no—light, or electromagnetic radiation, has no mass. If we can determine that it has mass, then it’s not light.
This is a question we can answer, by analyzing how lightsabers move when you wave them around. In other words, it’s time for some physics!
Mass and Motion
Don’t confuse mass and weight. Mass is a measure of how much “stuff” like protons, neutrons, and electrons are in an object, and weight is the amount of gravitational force acting on an object. Here we want to see what impact the mass of a lightsaber would have on its motion. But let’s start with something simpler.
Instead of a lightsaber, say we have a “lightball” made of the same buzzy substance. Since it’s symmetrical, we can describe its motion without worrying about rotation. If we want to move this ball back and forth, we call on Newton’s second law of motion. This says the acceleration (a) of an object depends on its mass (m) and the amount of force (F) applied to it.
-
Tech1 week agoA Brain Implant for Depression Is About to Be Tested in Humans
-
Tech1 week agoAlmost 90% of women leave tech industry within 10 years | Computer Weekly
-
Business1 week agoPakistan’s oil market is fuelling the crisis | The Express Tribune
-
Business7 days ago‘I had £20,000 stolen and had to fight a 13-month fraud reporting rule to get it back’
-
Sports6 days agoPro wrestling star Steph De Lander reveals how colleague’s advice helped lead her to title triumph at ACW
-
Entertainment1 week agoNorway joins Type 26 Frigate Programme to boost NATO naval power
-
Entertainment1 week agoMelania Trump says ABC should ‘take a stand’ on late-night host Kimmel
-
Tech6 days agoThis Ambitious Laptop Doesn’t Leave Much Room for Your Hands




