Composite Speech Spectrum for Hearing Aid Gain Prescriptions

Cox, Robyn M.; Moore, Jeffrey N.

doi:10.1044/jshr.3101.102

Cited by 94 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the input side, research by Dunn and White (1940) provided information about typical speech levels, dynamic ranges, and long-term average speech spectra that were the basis for most linear and nonlinear fitting prescriptions for hearing aids (Skinner, 1988;Valente, 2002b;Byrne and Dillon, 1986;Cornelisse et al, 1995). Subsequent research has indicated that long-term average speech spectra are significantly different for male and female speakers in the low and high frequencies (Cox and Moore, 1988).…”

Section: The Differences and Similarities Of Hearing Aids And Cochleamentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive Dynamic Range Optimization (ADRO): A Digital Amplification Strategy for Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants

Blamey¹

2005

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adaptive dynamic range optimization (ADRO) is an amplification strategy that uses digital signal processing techniques to improve the audibility, comfort, and intelligibility of sounds for people who use cochlear implants and/or hearing aids. The strategy uses statistical analysis to select the most information-rich section of the input dynamic range in multiplefrequency channels. Fuzzy logic rules control the gain in each frequency channel so that the selected section of the dynamic range is presented at an audible and comfortable level. The ADRO processing thus adaptively optimizes the dynamic range of the signal in multiplefrequency channels. Clinical studies show that ADRO can be fitted easily to all degrees of hearing loss for hearing aids and cochlear implants in a direct and intuitive manner, taking the preferences of the listener into account. The result is high acceptance by new and experienced hearing aid users and strong preferences for ADRO compared with alternative amplification strategies. The ADRO processing is particularly well suited to bimodal and hybrid stimulation which combine electric and acoustic stimulation in opposite ears or in the same ear, respectively.

show abstract

Section: The Differences and Similarities Of Hearing Aids And Cochleamentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive Dynamic Range Optimization (ADRO): A Digital Amplification Strategy for Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants

Blamey¹

2005

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The long-term average spectrum of speech (LTASS) is a direct measure of the mean sound pressure level of speech as a function of frequency, and provides a global representation of the acoustic characteristics of continuous discourse (Cox & Moore, 1988). The LTASS has been measured for a single subject (e.g., Byrne, 1977;Izdebski, 1980) and the spectra of several individuals have been averaged to characterize the speech of various populations, including: adult males, adult females, children and hearing-impaired adolescents (e.g., Byrne, 1977;Dunn & White, 1940;Formby & Monsen, 1982).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ear Level Recordings of the Long-Term Average Spectrum of Speech*

1991

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The long-term average speech spectrum (LTASS) was measured at two different recording positions: 30 cm directly in front of the talker (reference position), and at the tragus of the talker's ear (ear-level position), for three groups of subjects: adult males, adult females, and children. Results indicated significant differences in the overall level and frequency spectra between the LTASS obtained at each microphone location. For all three groups of subjects the LTASS measured at the ear-level position consisted of more low frequency energy (i.e., below 1000 Hz) and less high frequency energy (i.e., above 2500 Hz) than did the LTASS measured at the reference microphone position. The findings suggest that the algorithms currently used to prescribe hearing aid gain may underestimate the sensation level of a hearing-impaired individual's own amplified speech productions at frequencies below 1000 Hz and overestimate the sensation level of a talker's own speech above 2500 Hz. The implications of these findings concerning selection of the electroacoustic characteristics of an amplification system for hearing-impaired individuals are discussed. (Ear Hear 12 1:47-54)

show abstract

“…It is important to note that noise has been found to transiently elevate diastolic and systolic pressure in volunteers exposed to 75 dB-A noise [24]. Other potentially occurring non-auditory effects in tractor operators may include the influence of noise on fatigue and work quality (especially due to coexisting whole-body vibration) [7,8,25,26], the operator's alienation from surrounding noises and conversation problems [27][28][29][30][31]. In the examined tractors, the highest noise levels (although of various values) were identified for the 1000-2000 Hz frequency range of the speaking voice (Figure 2).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Audible and infrasonic noise levels in the cabins of modern agricultural tractors — Does the risk of adverse, exposure-dependent effects still exist?

Bilski¹

2013

International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:The agricultural tractor is one of the most commonly used vehicles on farms and one of the most prominent sources of noise. This article presents an exemplary assessment of the audible and infrasonic noise levels in the cabins of selected modern wheeled agricultural tractors. Materials and Methods: Operator-perceived audible and infrasonic noise levels in the cabins were examined for 20 types of modern tractors during typical conditions of work. The tractors had been in use for no longer than 3 years, with rated power between 96 kW and 227 kW, designed and produced by world-renowned companies. Noise level measurements were performed in accordance with PN-EN ISO 9612:2011 (ISO 9612:2009. Results: Audible noise levels (A-weighted) ranged from 62.1 to 87.4 dB-A (average: 68.2 to 83.8 dB-A) for different work tasks. The factors influencing noise levels include performed tasks, soil, weather conditions and the skills of individual drivers. In spectrum analysis, the highest noise levels occurred at frequencies 250 Hz, 1 and 2 kHz. Infrasound noise levels (G-weighted) ranged from 87.3 to 111.3 dB-G. The driver-experienced exposure to infrasound was found to increase significantly when the vehicle was in motion. Conclusions: Average audible noise levels have no potential to adversely affect the hearing organ during tasks performed inside the closed cabins of the analysed modern agricultural tractors. Due to the relatively low audible noise levels inside the cabins of modern agricultural tractors, non-auditory effects are the only adverse symptoms that can develop. Modern agricultural tractors emit considerable infrasonic noise levels. All tractors introduced into the market should be subjected to tests with regard to infrasonic noise levels.

show abstract

Composite Speech Spectrum for Hearing Aid Gain Prescriptions

Cited by 94 publications

References 9 publications

Adaptive Dynamic Range Optimization (ADRO): A Digital Amplification Strategy for Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants

Adaptive Dynamic Range Optimization (ADRO): A Digital Amplification Strategy for Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants

Ear Level Recordings of the Long-Term Average Spectrum of Speech*

Audible and infrasonic noise levels in the cabins of modern agricultural tractors — Does the risk of adverse, exposure-dependent effects still exist?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About