EarCentric EasyCharge vs Fortell AI Hearing Aids

The EarCentric EasyCharge is a budget-priced prescription hearing aid available for $229, earning a C grade with a SoundScore of 2.7/5 in our lab testing. This behind-the-ear rechargeable device ranks #36 of 39 prescription hearing aids tested, placing it in the bottom tier of its category. In our standardized testing, the EasyCharge demonstrates a stark performance divide. Its standout strength is feedback handling, scoring an excellent 5.0/5—slightly above the category average of 4.72. This means users can expect stable performance without whistling during typical daily activities. However, speech clarity metrics tell a different story: speech in quiet scores just 1.0/5, which is 2.40 points below the category average, and speech in noise also scores 1.0/5, falling 1.11 points below average. Music streaming scored 0.0/5, indicating this device is not suitable for audio enjoyment. Own-voice comfort is also limited at 1.9/5, which is 0.80 points below the prescription hearing aid average of 2.70. The device showed no improvement between initial and tuned fitting conditions, with both scoring 2.7/5. At this price point, shoppers should note that alternatives exist with meaningfully better performance. The RxEars Rxi, available in the same price range, scores 4.07/5. The EasyCharge may appeal to those prioritizing feedback-free operation on a tight budget, but its low speech clarity scores suggest significant limitations for everyday conversation.

The Fortell AI Hearing Aids are a premium prescription behind-the-ear device priced at $6,800, earning an A grade with a SoundScore of 6.0/5 in HearAdvisor lab testing—an exceptional result that places this device at the top of the prescription hearing aid category. Speech performance is where the Fortell AI truly distinguishes itself. Speech in noise scores an outstanding 6.0/5, a full 3.89 points above the category average of 2.11/5—the kind of margin that represents a meaningful difference in challenging listening environments like restaurants or group conversations. Speech in quiet also excels at 4.6/5, sitting 1.20 points above the category average. Music streaming performs strongly at 4.2/5, coming in 1.44 points above average for the category. The device does have a notable limitation: own-voice comfort scores just 1.5/5, falling 1.20 points below the category average. This low absolute score suggests wearers may notice occlusion effects when speaking. Feedback handling is excellent at 4.8/5, essentially matching the category average. Best suited for: Users who prioritize understanding speech in difficult listening situations and value streaming quality, and who can tolerate potential own-voice occlusion. Given the premium price point, buyers should weigh whether the exceptional speech-in-noise performance justifies the investment compared to alternatives like the Oticon Intent or Oticon Zeal, which offer strong performance at lower price points.