The Causes and Effects of Distortion and Internal Noise in Hearing Aids

Agnew, Jeremy

doi:10.1177/108471389800300302

Cited by 17 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hearing protectors have little effect on speech intelligibility if the speech signal is strong enough so that it is fully audible after suffering the attenuation of the protector. it is important to note that the audibility limitation becomes important when the user has a significant hearing loss [5]. The results from studies of sound localization with hearing protectors have been consistent with expectations from the known disruption of the physical cues [2] [15].…”

Section: Hearing Protectorssupporting

confidence: 52%

“…Another effect of using a hearing aid is that noise (from the aid's microphone or circuit) can be audible to the user [5]. While this is typically not a major problem with hearing aids because ambient noise usually dominates internal aid noise, it is a potential issue with the proposed Transparent Hearing System when used in very quiet environments.…”

Section: Hearing Aidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By using a sound-field microphone 5 , it is possible to capture the three-dimensional sound field and present it using headphones to a listener. If it were possible to create a sound-field microphone on or around the helmet or headphones, that sound-field could be converted to a binaural signal, thus giving the listener a natural display of the sound-field that preserves direction information.…”

Section: Sound-field Microphonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…If it were possible to create a sound-field microphone on or around the helmet or headphones, that sound-field could be converted to a binaural signal, thus giving the listener a natural display of the sound-field that preserves direction information. In addition, virtual 3-D sources (such as communications signals) can be efficiently encoded into Ambisonic B-format 5 and mixed in with the microphone signal. Therefore, it would not require any additional filtering resources to have a mixture of virtual and actual sources presented to the listener.…”

Section: Sound-field Microphonementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Concept and Technology Exploration for Transparent Hearing

Chapin¹,

Zurek²,

Shinn‐Cunningham³

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data so.1rces gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collectiof of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Department of Defense, Executive Services and Communications Directorate (0704-0188). Respondents should b4 aware that notwithstanding any other provision of Law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for falling to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently velic OMB control number. orifices, including the ears, to achieve minimal protection. Additionally, warfighting involves operating in very close proximity to loud equipment, from which the noise can degrade an individual's auditory perception, and over time can degrade general performance. Common hearing protection and occlusion isolates the warfighter from the environment, deflating situational awareness, confidence, and effectiveness, thus putting the warfighter at high risk and compromising his ability to detect and assesm threats. Often, soldiers are so uncomfortable with the isolation of hearing protection that they will choose to go without hearing protection and expose themselves to painful and harmful noise, which can result in deafness and reduced effectiveness as warfighters. This effort includes a survey of relevant head-borne hear-through auditory systems, a selection of approaches to a transparent hearing solution, implementation of the approaches, and evaluation. PLEASE DO NOT

show abstract

Section: Hearing Protectorssupporting

confidence: 52%

Section: Hearing Aidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sound-field Microphonementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sound-field Microphonementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Concept and Technology Exploration for Transparent Hearing

Chapin¹,

Zurek²,

Shinn‐Cunningham³

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The contribution of the direct sound path through the vent can also help overcome problems with audible microphone noise that is found to be objectionable to some hearing-aid users with a mild hearing loss, or near-normal hearing, at low frequencies (Macrae & Dillon, 1996;Lee & Geddes, 1998;Agnew, 1998). Finally, at least two studies have reported that vented moulds improved the overall sound quality of hearing aids relative to reducing the low-frequency gain electronically (Cox & Alexander, 1983) and relative to an occluding ear mould (Kuk, 1991).…”

Section: Sumariomentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of low-frequency gain and venting effects on the benefit derived from directionality and noise reduction in hearing aids

Keidser

Carter

Chalupper

et al. 2007

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When the frequency range over which vent-transmitted sound dominates amplification increases, the potential benefit from directional microphones and noise reduction decreases. Fitted with clinically appropriate vent sizes, 23 aided listeners with varying low-frequency hearing thresholds evaluated six schemes comprising three levels of gain at 250 Hz (0, 6, and 12 dB) combined with two features (directional microphone and noise reduction) enabled or disabled in the field. The low-frequency gain was 0 dB for vent-dominated sound, while the higher gains were achieved by amplifier-dominated sounds. A majority of listeners preferred 0-dB gain at 250 Hz and the features enabled. While the amount of low-frequency gain had no significant effect on speech recognition in noise or horizontal localization, speech recognition and front/back discrimination were significantly improved when the features were enabled, even when vent-transmitted sound dominated the low frequencies. The clinical implication is that there is no need to increase low-frequency gain to compensate for vent effects to achieve benefit from directionality and noise reduction over a wider frequency range.

show abstract