Literature DB >> 25470368

Effects of WDRC release time and number of channels on output SNR and speech recognition.

Joshua M Alexander1, Katie Masterson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the joint effects that wide dynamic range compression (WDRC) release time (RT) and number of channels have on recognition of sentences in the presence of steady and modulated maskers at different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). How the different combinations of WDRC parameters affect output SNR and the role this plays in the observed findings were also investigated.
DESIGN: Twenty-four listeners with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss identified sentences mixed with steady or modulated maskers at three SNRs (-5, 0, and +5 dB) that had been processed using a hearing aid simulator with six combinations of RT (40 and 640 msec) and number of channels (4, 8, and 16). Compression parameters were set using the Desired Sensation Level v5.0a prescriptive fitting method. For each condition, amplified speech and masker levels and the resultant long-term output SNR were measured.
RESULTS: Speech recognition with WDRC depended on the combination of RT and number of channels, with the greatest effects observed at 0 dB input SNR, in which mean speech recognition scores varied by 10 to 12% across WDRC manipulations. Overall, effect sizes were generally small. Across both masker types and the three SNRs tested, the best speech recognition was obtained with eight channels, regardless of RT. Increased speech levels, which favor audibility, were associated with the short RT and with an increase in the number of channels. These same conditions also increased masker levels by an even greater amount, for a net decrease in the long-term output SNR. Changes in long-term SNR across WDRC conditions were found to be strongly associated with changes in the temporal envelope shape as quantified by the Envelope Difference Index; however, neither of these factors fully explained the observed differences in speech recognition.
CONCLUSIONS: A primary finding of this study was that the number of channels had a modest effect when analyzed at each level of RT, with results suggesting that selecting eight channels for a given RT might be the safest choice. Effects were smaller for RT, with results suggesting that short RT was slightly better when only 4 channels were used and that long RT was better when 16 channels were used. Individual differences in how listeners were influenced by audibility, output SNR, temporal distortion, and spectral distortion may have contributed to the size of the effects found in this study. Because only general suppositions could made for how each of these factors may have influenced the overall results of this study, future research would benefit from exploring the predictive value of these and other factors in selecting the processing parameters that maximize speech recognition for individuals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25470368      PMCID: PMC4336616          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  55 in total

1.  Effects of spectro-temporal modulation changes produced by multi-channel compression on intelligibility in a competing-speech task.

Authors:  Michael A Stone; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 2.  The choice of compression speed in hearing AIDS: theoretical and practical considerations and the role of individual differences.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2008-06

3.  Compression and its effect on the speech signal.

Authors:  J Verschuure; A J Maas; E Stikvoort; R M de Jong; A Goedegebure; W A Dreschler
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Effects of compression on speech acoustics, intelligibility, and sound quality.

Authors:  Pamela E Souza
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2002-12

5.  The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function.

Authors:  R Plomp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Consequences of broad auditory filters for identification of multichannel-compressed vowels.

Authors:  Pamela Souza; Richard Wright; Stephanie Bor
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2011-12-29       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  A new technique for quantifying temporal envelope contrasts.

Authors:  T W Fortune; B D Woodruff; D A Preves
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children.

Authors:  J Bench; A Kowal; J Bamford
Journal:  Br J Audiol       Date:  1979-08

9.  The influence of audibility on speech recognition with nonlinear frequency compression for children and adults with hearing loss.

Authors:  Ryan W McCreery; Joshua Alexander; Marc A Brennan; Brenda Hoover; Judy Kopun; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Effects of moderate cochlear hearing loss on the ability to benefit from temporal fine structure information in speech.

Authors:  Kathryn Hopkins; Brian C J Moore; Michael A Stone
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  15 in total

1.  Effect of Context and Hearing Loss on Time-Gated Word Recognition in Children.

Authors:  Dawna Lewis; Judy Kopun; Ryan McCreery; Marc Brennan; Kanae Nishi; Evan Cordrey; Pat Stelmachowicz; Mary Pat Moeller
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Nonlinear frequency compression: Influence of start frequency and input bandwidth on consonant and vowel recognition.

Authors:  Joshua M Alexander
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Effects of reverberation, background talker number, and compression release time on signal-to-noise ratio.

Authors:  Paul Reinhart; Pavel Zahorik; Pamela E Souza
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  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

5.  Neural-scaled entropy predicts the effects of nonlinear frequency compression on speech perception.

Authors:  Varsha H Rallapalli; Joshua M Alexander
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Output signal-to-noise ratio and speech perception in noise: effects of algorithm.

Authors:  Christi W Miller; Ruth A Bentler; Yu-Hsiang Wu; James Lewis; Kelly Tremblay
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss.

Authors:  Marc A Brennan; Ryan McCreery; Judy Kopun; Brenda Hoover; Joshua Alexander; Dawna Lewis; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.664

8.  Listening Effort and Speech Recognition with Frequency Compression Amplification for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Marc A Brennan; Dawna Lewis; Ryan McCreery; Judy Kopun; Joshua M Alexander
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Masking Release in Children and Adults With Hearing Loss When Using Amplification.

Authors:  Marc Brennan; Ryan McCreery; Judy Kopun; Dawna Lewis; Joshua Alexander; Patricia Stelmachowicz
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  The relationship between ipsilateral cochlear gain reduction and speech-in-noise recognition at positive and negative signal-to-noise ratios.

Authors:  Kristina DeRoy Milvae; Joshua M Alexander; Elizabeth A Strickland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-05       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.