Non-linear signal processing in digital hearing aids

Scandinavian Audiology, Supplement

Volumn 27, Issue 49, 1998, Pages 40-49

  Lunner, Thomas ^a,c   Hellgren, Johan ^a   Arlinger, Stig ^a   Elberling, Claus ^b  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b OTICON A S   (Denmark)

^c LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Compression limiting; Digital signal processing (DSP); Dynamic range compression; Field test; Filterbank; Multichannel

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; AUDITORY MASKING; COMPRESSION; CONFERENCE PAPER; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HEARING LOSS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NOISE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SOUND; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; ARTICLE; HEARING DISORDER; INSTRUMENTATION; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSIOLOGY; PILOT STUDY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHMS; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING DISORDERS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PILOT PROJECTS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0032466131     PISSN: 01078593     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/010503998420649     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. Barfod J. Multichannel compression hearing aids: experiments and considerations on clinical applicability. Scand Audiol 1978: (Suppl. 6): 315-40
2. Byrne D, Dillon H. The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hearing 1986; 7: 257-65.
3. Benson D, Clark TM, Johnson JS. Patient experiences with multiband full dynamic range compression. Ear Hearing 1992; 13: 320-30.
4. Bonding P, Elberling C. Loudness summation across frequency under masking and in sensorineural hearing loss. Audiology 1980; 19: 57-74.
5. Danaher EM, Osberger MJ, Pickett JM. Discrimination of formant frequency transitions in synthetic vowels. J Speech Hear Res 1973; 16: 439-51.
6. Dillon H. Compression? Yes, but for low or high frequencies, for low or high intensities, and with what response times? Ear Hearing 1996; 17: 287-307.
7. Gagné JP. Excess masking among listeners with a sensorineural hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 1988; 83: 2311-21.
8. Hagerman B. Clinical measurements of speech reception threshold in noise. Scand Audiol 1984; 13: 57-63.
9. Hagerman B, Kinnefors C. Efficient adaptive methods for measurements of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. Scand Audiol 1995; 24: 71-7.
10. Hawkins DB, Naidoo SV. Comparison of sound quality and clarity with asymmetrical peak clipping and output limiting compression. J Am Acad Audiol 1993; 4: 221-8.
11. Hawkins DB, Waiden BE, Montgomery AA, Prosek RA. Description and validation of an LDL procedure designed to select SSPL90. Ear Hearing 1987; 8: 162-9.
12. Lunner T, Hellgren J. A digital filterbank hearing aid: design, implementation and evaluation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP 91), Toronto, Canada 1991; 5: 3661-4.
13. Lunner T, Hellgren J, Arlinger S, Elberling C. A digital filterbank hearing aid: predicting user preference and performance for two signal processing algorithms. Ear Hear 1997a; 18: 12-25.
14. Lunner T, Hellgren J, Arlinger S, Elberling C. A digital filterbank hearing aid: three Digital Signal Processing algorithms - user preference and performance. Ear Hear 1997b; 18: 373-87.
15. Mangold S, Leijon A. Programmable hearing aid with multichannel compression. Scand Audiol 1979; 8: 121-6.
16. Manly BFJ. Multivariate statistical methods: a primer. New York. Chapman & Hall, 1986.
17. McCandless GA, Lyregaard PE. Prescription of gain and output (POGO) in hearing aids. Hear Instr 1983; 34: 16-21.
18. Moore BCJ. Perceptual consequences of cochlear hearing loss and their implications for the design of hearing aids. Ear Hear 1996; 17: 133-60.
19. Moore BCJ, Johnson JS, Clark TM, Pluvinage V. Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 349-70.
20. Olsen J. From acoustic amplification to hearing loss compensation. Hear Instr 1992; 43: 12-8.
21. Ono H, Kanzaki J, Mizoi K. Clinical results of hearing aid with noise-level-controlled selective amplification. Audiology 1983; 22: 494-515.
22. Plomp R. The negative effect of amplitude compression in multi-channel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function. J Acoust Soc Am 1988; 83: 2322-7.
23. Plomp R. Noise, amplification, and compression: considerations of three main issues in hearing aid design. Ear Hear 1994; 15: 2-12.
24. Schwartz DM, Lyregaard PE, Lundh P. Hearing aid selection for severe-to-profound hearing loss (POGO II). Hear J 1988; 41: 13-7.
25. Steinberg, JC, Gardner, MB. The dependency of hearing impairment on sound intensity. J Acoust Soc Am 1937; 9: 11-23.
26. Summers V, Leek MR. Intraspeech spread of masking in normal-hearing and hearing impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1997; 101: 2866-76.
27. Trees DE, Turner CW. Spread of masking in normal subjects and in subjects with high frequency hearing loss. Audiology 1986; 25: 70-83
28. Van Dijkhuizen JN, Festen JM, Plomp R. The effect of frequency-selective attenuation on the speech-reception threshold of sentences in conditions of low frequency noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1991; 90: 885-94.
29. Villchur E. Signal processing to improve speech intelligibility in perceptive deafness. J Acoust Soc Am 1973; 53: 1646-57.