Literature DB >> 10509859

Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting: III. A general method for deriving initial fittings for hearing aids with multi-channel compression.

B C Moore1, B R Glasberg, M A Stone.   

Abstract

A model for predicting loudness for people with cochlear hearing loss is applied to the problem of the initial fitting of multi-channel fast-acting compression hearing aids. The fitting is based entirely on the pure tone audiogram, and does not require measures of loudness growth. One constraint is always applied: the specific loudness pattern evoked by speech of a moderate level (65 dB SPL) should be reasonably flat (equal loudness per critical band), and the overall loudness should be similar to that evoked in a normal listener by 65-dB speech. This is achieved using the 'Cambridge' formula. For hearing aids where the compression threshold in each channel can be set to a very low value, an additional constraint is used: speech with an overall level of 45 dB SPL should be audible over its entire dynamic range in all frequency channels from 500 Hz up to about 4 kHz. For hearing aids where the compression thresholds cannot be set to very low values, a different additional constraint is used: the specific loudness pattern evoked by speech of a high level (85 dB SPL, and with the spectral characteristics of shouted speech) should be reasonably flat, and the overall loudness should be similar to that evoked in a normal listener by 85-dB speech. For both cases, compression ratios are limited to values below 3. For each of these two cases, we show how to derive compression ratios and gains, and for the first case, compression thresholds, for each channel. The derivations apply to systems with any number of channels. A computer program implementing the derivations is described. The program also calculates target insertion gains at the centre frequency of each channel for input levels of 50, 65 and 80 dB SPL, and target gains at the eardrum measured relative to the level at the reference microphone of a probe microphone system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10509859     DOI: 10.3109/03005369909090105

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Audiol        ISSN: 0300-5364


  11 in total

1.  A comparison of NAL and DSL prescriptive methods for paediatric hearing-aid fitting: predicted speech intelligibility and loudness.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Earl E Johnson; Sanna Hou; Harvey Dillon; Vicky Zhang; Lauren Burns; Patricia van Buynder; Angela Wong; Christopher Flynn
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.117

2.  Audiological practice in India: an internet-based survey of audiologists.

Authors:  Vijayalakshmi Easwar; Sriram Boothalingam; Srikanth Chundu; Vinaya K C Manchaiah; S Mohammed Ismail
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2013-08-02

3.  Categorical loudness scaling and equal-loudness contours in listeners with normal hearing and hearing loss.

Authors:  Daniel M Rasetshwane; Andrea C Trevino; Jessa N Gombert; Lauren Liebig-Trehearn; Judy G Kopun; Walt Jesteadt; Stephen T Neely; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Implications of high-frequency cochlear dead regions for fitting hearing aids to adults with mild to moderately severe hearing loss.

Authors:  Robyn M Cox; Jani A Johnson; Genevieve C Alexander
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Dead regions in the cochlea: diagnosis, perceptual consequences, and implications for the fitting of hearing AIDS.

Authors:  B C Moore
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2001-03

Review 6.  The DSL method for pediatric hearing instrument fitting: historical perspective and current issues.

Authors:  Richard Seewald; Sheila Moodie; Susan Scollie; Marlene Bagatto
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2005

7.  Spectro-temporal characteristics of speech at high frequencies, and the potential for restoration of audibility to people with mild-to-moderate hearing loss.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore; Michael A Stone; Christian Füllgrabe; Brian R Glasberg; Sunil Puria
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 8.  Effects of bandwidth, compression speed, and gain at high frequencies on preferences for amplified music.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-11-19

Review 9.  Development and current status of the "Cambridge" loudness models.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 3.293

10.  Dynamic Range Across Music Genres and the Perception of Dynamic Compression in Hearing-Impaired Listeners.

Authors:  Martin Kirchberger; Frank A Russo
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 3.293

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.