Test report: Auracast assistive listening system in a theatre

Summary

A trial installation of one Auracast transmitter system in the Alte Reithalle of Bühne Aarau, covering reception, microphone placement and latency.

Key findings

• A single transmitter in the roof structure, roughly in the middle of the room, was received at all seats of the hall of about 22 x 80 m. Whether this holds with hundreds of phones in the audience was not tested.
• Transmitter-to-receiver latency was 36 to 43 ms to receivers with neckloops, depending on configuration, and 56 to 58 ms to the hearing aids used, which the authors judged too long.
• Adding about 30 ms for the audio system and the sound path to a distant directional microphone gave a total of roughly 65 to 90 ms, which the authors call problematic for some seats, such as near the front with open or one-sided fittings.
• Intelligibility depended mainly on microphones close to the talker's mouth. Distant directional microphones gave insufficient intelligibility, and a listener near the front could hear better without the system.
• The introduction identifies the test system as Auri from Listen Technologies. The latency section identifies GN ReSound Nexia hearing aids and receivers with inductive neckloops; coverage is not mapped separately by receiver. The reception section leaves operation with hundreds of audience smartphones to be established in use and gives no audience count for the trial.
• The latency section identifies the hearing aids behind the 56-58 ms result as GN ReSound Nexia; it does not give an instrument or timing procedure.
• In the latency section, the warning about front seats and open or one-sided fittings is an explanation of where delay can be problematic, not a reported comparison of listener groups. The roughly 65–90 ms total spans neckloop-receiver and hearing aid paths after adding about 30 ms for the venue audio system or acoustic travel to the directional microphone.

Limits

One room, one transmitter system and one hearing aid model (GN ReSound Nexia, named in the latency section); listener and audience counts unstated, with crowded operation untested. No comparison of fitting types or separate financial support is reported. Latency depends on the configuration and firmware at the time.

Read the original

pro-audito.ch/news/testbericht-auracast-hoeranlage-im-theater

Link checked 13 October 2026. We link to the original and do not host copies.

Cited in

• Should the Auracast stream be delayed to line up with the loudspeakers?Open
• How far does one transmitter really reach in a full room?Partly answered
• Auracast, hearing loop, infrared, RF or Wi-Fi: which suits which room?Disputed
• Should a venue keep its hearing loop when it adds Auracast, and can one system serve both?Partly answered
• What works in courtrooms, council chambers and other meeting rooms where speech must be heard by all and kept in the room?Partly answered
• What works in theatres and cinemas, and what do the rules ask of them?Partly answered
• Are hearing aids set up well enough to use Auracast in venues?Partly answered

Cite this source

The accessed date is when this library last checked the link; use the date you read it. To point readers to this summary instead, link to https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2025-theatre-aarau/

Every finding here cites its source, and who funded each source is labelled. This site does not recommend products. Found an error or a missing study? Suggest a correction.