Suzanne Carr Levy1, Daniel J Freed, Michael Nilsson, Brian C J Moore, Sunil Puria. 1. 1EarLens Corporation, Menlo Park, California, USA; 2Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; 3Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA; and 4Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The hypothesis that extending the audible frequency bandwidth beyond the range currently implemented in most hearing aids can improve speech understanding was tested for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired participants using target sentences and spatially separated masking speech. DESIGN: The Hearing In Speech Test (HIST) speech corpus was re-recorded, and four masking talkers were recorded at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz. All talkers were male native speakers of American English. For each subject, the reception threshold for sentences (RTS) was measured in two spatial configurations. In the asymmetric configuration, the target was presented from -45° azimuth and two colocated masking talkers were presented from +45° azimuth. In the diffuse configuration, the target was presented from 0° azimuth and four masking talkers were each presented from a different azimuth: +45°, +135°, -135°, and -45°. The new speech sentences, masking materials, and configurations were presented using low-pass filter cutoff frequencies of 4, 6, 8, and 10 kHz. For the normal-hearing participants, stimuli were presented in the sound field using loudspeakers. For the hearing-impaired participants, the spatial configurations were simulated using earphones, and a multiband wide-dynamic-range compressor with a modified CAM2 fitting algorithm was used to compensate for each participant's hearing loss. RESULTS: For the normal-hearing participants (N = 24, mean age 40 years), the RTS improved significantly by 3.0 dB when the bandwidth was increased from 4 to 10 kHz, and a significant improvement of 1.3 dB was obtained from extending the bandwidth from 6 to 10 kHz, in both spatial configurations. Hearing-impaired participants (N = 25, mean age 71 years) also showed a significant improvement in RTS with extended bandwidth, but the effect was smaller than for the normal-hearing participants. The mean decrease in RTS when the bandwidth was increased from 4 to 10 kHz was 1.3 dB for the asymmetric condition and 0.5 dB for the diffuse condition. CONCLUSIONS: Extending bandwidth from 4 to 10 kHz can improve the ability of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired participants to understand target speech in the presence of spatially separated masking speech. Future studies of the benefits of extended high-frequency amplification should investigate other realistic listening situations, masker types, spatial configurations, and room reverberation conditions, to determine added value in overcoming the technical challenges associated with implementing a device capable of providing extended high-frequency amplification.
OBJECTIVES: The hypothesis that extending the audible frequency bandwidth beyond the range currently implemented in most hearing aids can improve speech understanding was tested for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired participants using target sentences and spatially separated masking speech. DESIGN: The Hearing In Speech Test (HIST) speech corpus was re-recorded, and four masking talkers were recorded at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz. All talkers were male native speakers of American English. For each subject, the reception threshold for sentences (RTS) was measured in two spatial configurations. In the asymmetric configuration, the target was presented from -45° azimuth and two colocated masking talkers were presented from +45° azimuth. In the diffuse configuration, the target was presented from 0° azimuth and four masking talkers were each presented from a different azimuth: +45°, +135°, -135°, and -45°. The new speech sentences, masking materials, and configurations were presented using low-pass filter cutoff frequencies of 4, 6, 8, and 10 kHz. For the normal-hearing participants, stimuli were presented in the sound field using loudspeakers. For the hearing-impaired participants, the spatial configurations were simulated using earphones, and a multiband wide-dynamic-range compressor with a modified CAM2 fitting algorithm was used to compensate for each participant's hearing loss. RESULTS: For the normal-hearing participants (N = 24, mean age 40 years), the RTS improved significantly by 3.0 dB when the bandwidth was increased from 4 to 10 kHz, and a significant improvement of 1.3 dB was obtained from extending the bandwidth from 6 to 10 kHz, in both spatial configurations. Hearing-impaired participants (N = 25, mean age 71 years) also showed a significant improvement in RTS with extended bandwidth, but the effect was smaller than for the normal-hearing participants. The mean decrease in RTS when the bandwidth was increased from 4 to 10 kHz was 1.3 dB for the asymmetric condition and 0.5 dB for the diffuse condition. CONCLUSIONS: Extending bandwidth from 4 to 10 kHz can improve the ability of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired participants to understand target speech in the presence of spatially separated masking speech. Future studies of the benefits of extended high-frequency amplification should investigate other realistic listening situations, masker types, spatial configurations, and room reverberation conditions, to determine added value in overcoming the technical challenges associated with implementing a device capable of providing extended high-frequency amplification.
Authors: Susan Scollie; Richard Seewald; Leonard Cornelisse; Sheila Moodie; Marlene Bagatto; Diana Laurnagaray; Steve Beaulac; John Pumford Journal: Trends Amplif Date: 2005
Authors: Lina Motlagh Zadeh; Noah H Silbert; Katherine Sternasty; De Wet Swanepoel; Lisa L Hunter; David R Moore Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2019-11-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Marlies Knipper; Pim van Dijk; Holger Schulze; Birgit Mazurek; Patrick Krauss; Verena Scheper; Athanasia Warnecke; Winfried Schlee; Kerstin Schwabe; Wibke Singer; Christoph Braun; Paul H Delano; Andreas J Fallgatter; Ann-Christine Ehlis; Grant D Searchfield; Matthias H J Munk; David M Baguley; Lukas Rüttiger Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2020-09-16 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Lisa L Hunter; Brian B Monson; David R Moore; Sumitrajit Dhar; Beverly A Wright; Kevin J Munro; Lina Motlagh Zadeh; Chelsea M Blankenship; Samantha M Stiepan; Jonathan H Siegel Journal: Hear Res Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 3.208