I've heard it said by a hearing aid industry professional that too much time was spent on connectivity that could have been better used in improving core hearing aid functionality such as speech and noise. I both disagree with that and also understand their frustration. I disagree because modern life for many is as much a connected digital experience as it is an in-person experience. I'll share just one example why that matters. For many people, internet meetings are of way of life and their professions. One underappreciated fact is that if one cannot hear well, they will remember less of what was actually discussed. That automatically puts hearing impaired people at a disadvantage. Here's one study that illustrates this. The study subjects were an equal mix of people with and without hearing loss. The basis of the study was performance on the Hopkins verbal learning test revised edition. In this test, subjects learned a list of words, then recall us tested after about 20 minutes. As a control, all subjects were given to test visually. People with and without hearing loss scored about the same on average. Next, the test was given verbally. Those with hearing loss took the test unated. Their average score was about half that of the people without hearing loss. Then, an interesting test was performed. Those with hearing loss were given corrected audio and those without were given audio simulating hearing loss. The results were reversed. People who cannot hear well score substantially lower on the recall test. The trouble is typical speakers and monitors and opal computers just aren't that good. Hearing aids will help to an extent, but if the audio quality isn't good to begin with, plus you have external noise and room reflections, audibility will still be impeded. Sure, people can enable the captions and I recommend that they do if it helps. But if a person can also hear better, their ability to stay engaged will be improved. Without connectivity, it is more difficult to mitigate that this advantage hearing impaired people are forced to contend with in the virtual world. But at the same time, the lack of a connectivity standard that meets the needs of hearing impaired people forced each company to develop their own. This did indeed demand more valuable resources at each company. As a standard, anyone can adopt. All the audio will put an end to that. In addition, or a cast broadcast audio will enhance a much broader range of experiences for hearing impaired people compared to existing hearing loops. Let's start by breaking down the differences between Bluetooth, audio, and Bluetooth classic. L.E. stands for low energy. Today, the L.E. channel is used to transmit data. For example, my Garmin watch transmits my running data to my phone through the L.E. channel. The key innovation in the new Bluetooth standard is the past stereo audio through the L.E. channel. This means lower power consumption when streaming audio versus Bluetooth classic. The method of transmitting the left and right channels is also more reliable, making connectivity to true wireless devices more robust. For hearing impaired people, one of the most important improvements is reduced latency. When people generally consider the latency problem, it is in terms of video to audio synchronization. If the latency is too high, lip reading cues do not align with the audio, making watching movies more difficult. Even normal hearing people find it disquieting. To put numbers to it, Bluetooth classic has a typical delay of about 100 to 200 milliseconds, while L.E. audio can go as low as 20 to 30 milliseconds. Some years ago, phone acted a study which showed that even severely hearing impaired people found 33 milliseconds of latency to be acceptable. Above that, increasing numbers of people objected. Even mildly hearing impaired people overwhelmingly rejected 113 milliseconds. This is why the hearing aid companies develop proprietary TV streamers and remote microphones. 100 to 200 milliseconds is just too high, but 20 to 30 milliseconds will work great. It means when televisions and gaming consoles replace Bluetooth classic with L.E. audio, there will be no need to buy an external streamer. Just connect and go. That study was based purely on lip sound synchronization, but there is another important reason to have low latency. Watching TV is often done with others, and it's nice to talk to them while watching. Modern hearing aids allow one to vary the mix. For example, I can set mine to 50% streaming and 50% ambient. I get the benefit of streaming while still being able to hear my companions. But I get some of the audio from the TV speakers too. If I connect to the TV's Bluetooth classic, which my devices can do, the delay between TV speakers and streamed audio be far too high. Some TVs have a setting that allow one to add delay to the speaker audio. That can alleviate the problem for the hearing aid wearer, but everyone else now has a 200 millisecond delay between video and audio, which will be unacceptable to them. So the streaming delay must be made as low as possible. With L.E. audio, if I want to get it perfect and tweak the TV delay, other viewers experience only a small latency. Perfectly fine. Again, by incorporating low latency, L.E. audio and televisions, the viewing experience for both hearing impaired people and their normal hearing companions is much better. Without the need for a brand specific proprietary solution. Which brings us to ORACAST. ORACAST is broadcast audio over Bluetooth. With Bluetooth classic, only one set of headphones can be connected to the source audio at a time. But with ORACAST, any number of people can listen, just like a radio transmission. In this case, the tuner will typically be a smartphone app. Smart earbud cases are also starting to appear. These could also serve. The apps function is merely to choose the channel. Once the earbuds or hearing aids are on the desired channel, the phone is not needed. When my TV supports L.E. audio, it will most certainly support ORACAST too. There won't be any pairing at all. Just tune to the TV's transmission and enjoy. Any ORACAST compatible device can be used to listen. Earbuds, hearing aids, headsets, Bluetooth speakers, anything. A TV watching isn't the half of it. Telecoil loops or hearing loops have been an operation for many years to improve audibility and public venues for hearing impaired people. It requires a long copper wire loop to be strung around the seating area of the facility and can be quite expensive to install. Therefore, they're not as widely implemented as one would like. Even in regions where assistive listening systems are mandated, many facilities opt for lower-cost individual radio receivers. But ORACAST transmitters will be much less expensive. For example, this road wireless microphone I'm wearing right now has a range of about 200 meters and costs only about $100 US dollars. Even if a commercial grade transmitter costs several times that, it's nothing compared to the tens of thousands of dollars that a hearing loop can cost. This makes it practical to install ORACAST transmitters in any number of places. For example, imagine every metro car broadcasting the station stops through ORACAST. Even more interesting is that while only one hearing loop can operate than a single room, any number of ORACAST transmitters can be broadcasting each on its own channel. Now imagine a sports bar with 12 screens and each one of those is transmitting their audio. I can be watching a match over there and getting the audio in my ears. What's key is that any Bluetooth earphone supporting an audio could be used. The fact that every normal hearing person in the sports bar can tune into the audio as well as watch the match over there means there's a much greater impetus for installing ORACAST than there ever was with hearing loops. The use case is a bound. If I go back to the metro car scenario, imagine your normal hearing person who uses ANC earphones while commuting. With ORACAST in the car, you will be able to hear the station stops while you listen to your music, even with ANC turned on. Same at airport gates to use another example. I don't know about you, but unless I'm right on top of the desk, I can't understand the word they say. So mass market demand in situations like that will drive ORACAST implementation. I've heard it said that designing for accessibility is designing for everyone. But with the audio and ORACAST, designing for everyone will greatly improve accessibility for hearing impaired people. I for one can't wait to see it in general use.