Literature DB >> 22068224

A method to remove differences in frequency response between commercial hearing aids to allow direct comparison of the sound quality of hearing-aid features.

Rolph Houben1, Inge Brons, Wouter A Dreschler.   

Abstract

GOAL: We want to remove differences in frequency response between different commercial hearing aids so that we can compare the sound quality of signal processing features from different hearing-aid in a future paired-comparison set-up. More specifically, we want to control for the confounding effects of the linear hearing aid response when evaluating nonlinear processing. This article presents a control procedure and evaluates its effectiveness.
METHOD: We increased the similarity of hearing-aid recordings in three steps and used both an objective quality metric and listening tests to investigate if the recordings from different hearing aids were perceptually similar.
RESULTS: Neither was it sufficient to manually adjust the hearing-aid insertion gain, nor was it sufficient to add an additional bandwidth limitation to the recordings. Only after the application of an inverse filter the perceptual differences between recordings were removed adequately.
CONCLUSION: It was possible to level the ground between different hearing devices, so to speak. This will allow future research to evaluate the sound quality of nonlinear signal processing features.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22068224      PMCID: PMC4040834          DOI: 10.1177/1084713811413303

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trends Amplif        ISSN: 1084-7138


  13 in total

1.  Method for the selection of sentence materials for efficient measurement of the speech reception threshold.

Authors:  N J Versfeld; L Daalder; J M Festen; T Houtgast
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality.

Authors:  M Boymans; W A Dreschler
Journal:  Audiology       Date:  2000 Sep-Oct

Review 3.  Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: a systematic review of the evidence.

Authors:  Ruth A Bentler
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2005 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  Multicenter evaluation of signal enhancement algorithms for hearing aids.

Authors:  Heleen Luts; Koen Eneman; Jan Wouters; Michael Schulte; Matthias Vormann; Michael Buechler; Norbert Dillier; Rolph Houben; Wouter A Dreschler; Matthias Froehlich; Henning Puder; Giso Grimm; Volker Hohmann; Arne Leijon; Anthony Lombard; Dirk Mauler; Ann Spriet
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Modulation rate detection and discrimination by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  K W Grant; V Summers; M R Leek
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 6.  Perceptual consequences of cochlear hearing loss and their implications for the design of hearing aids.

Authors:  B C Moore
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Preference for and performance with damped and undamped hearing aids by listeners with sensorineural hearing loss.

Authors:  L A Davis; S A Davidson
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1996-06

8.  The effects of different frequency responses on sound quality judgments and speech intelligibility.

Authors:  A Gabrielsson; B N Schenkman; B Hagerman
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1988-06

9.  Perceived sound quality of sound-reproducing systems.

Authors:  A Gabrielsson; H Sjögren
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1979-04       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Thresholds of discomfort for complex stimuli: acoustic and sound-quality predictors.

Authors:  Rebecca L Warner; Ruth A Bender
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.297

View more
  3 in total

1.  Limitations of the Envelope Difference Index as a Metric for Nonlinear Distortion in Hearing Aids.

Authors:  James M Kates
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Using Objective Metrics to Measure Hearing Aid Performance.

Authors:  James M Kates; Kathryn H Arehart; Melinda C Anderson; Ramesh Kumar Muralimanohar; Lewis O Harvey
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Effects of noise reduction on speech intelligibility, perceived listening effort, and personal preference in hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Inge Brons; Rolph Houben; Wouter A Dreschler
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 3.293

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.