Perceptual Evaluation of Signal-to-Noise-Ratio-Aware Dynamic Range Compression in Hearing Aids.
hearing-aid signal processing
signal-to-noise ratio
speech intelligibility
subjective preference
wide dynamic range compression
Journal
Trends in hearing
ISSN: 2331-2165
Titre abrégé: Trends Hear
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101635698
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
entrez:
24
6
2020
pubmed:
24
6
2020
medline:
21
11
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Dynamic range compression is a compensation strategy commonly used in modern hearing aids. Fast-acting systems respond relatively quickly to the fluctuations in the input level. This allows for more effective compression of the dynamic range of speech and hence enhanced the audibility of its low-intensity components. However, such processing also amplifies the background noise, distorts the modulation spectra of both the speech and the background, and can reduce the output signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Recently, May et al. proposed a novel SNR-aware compression strategy, in which the compression speed is adapted depending on whether speech is present or absent. Fast-acting compression is applied to speech-dominated time-frequency (T-F) units, while noise-dominated T-F units are processed using slow-acting compression. It has been shown that this strategy provides a similar effective compression of the speech dynamic range as conventional fast-acting compression, while introducing fewer distortions of the modulation spectrum of the background and providing an improved output SNR. In this study, this SNR-aware compression strategy was compared with conventional fast- and slow-acting compression in terms of speech intelligibility and subjective preference in a group of 17 hearing-impaired listeners with varying degree of hearing loss. The results show a speech intelligibility benefit of the SNR-aware compression strategy over the conventional slow-acting system. Furthermore, the SNR-aware approach demonstrates an increased subjective preference compared with both conventional fast- and slow-acting systems.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32573373
doi: 10.1177/2331216520930531
pmc: PMC7313326
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2331216520930531Références
J Acoust Soc Am. 1998 May;103(5 Pt 1):2273-81
pubmed: 9604341
J Acoust Soc Am. 2006 Oct;120(4):2096-107
pubmed: 17069307
J Speech Hear Res. 1995 Jun;38(3):714-25
pubmed: 7674662
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998 Apr;41(2):315-26
pubmed: 9570585
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2015 Apr;58(2):520-34
pubmed: 25629388
Trends Hear. 2018 Jan-Dec;22:2331216518790903
pubmed: 30117366
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008 Apr;51(2):471-84
pubmed: 18367690
J Acoust Soc Am. 2013 Jun;133(6):4268-78
pubmed: 23742377
J Acoust Soc Am. 2017 Jun;141(6):4556
pubmed: 28679250
Br J Audiol. 1992 Dec;26(6):351-61
pubmed: 1292819
Ear Hear. 2009 Oct;30(5):494-504
pubmed: 19633563
J Acoust Soc Am. 1973 Jun;53(6):1646-57
pubmed: 4719256
J Acoust Soc Am. 1984 May;75(5):1606-12
pubmed: 6736424
J Speech Hear Res. 1985 Sep;28(3):455-62
pubmed: 4046587
Ear Hear. 2002 Aug;23(4):369-80
pubmed: 12195179
J Am Acad Audiol. 2015 Feb;26(2):183-96
pubmed: 25690777
Ear Hear. 1999 Dec;20(6):461-70
pubmed: 10613384
Int J Audiol. 2011 Mar;50(3):202-8
pubmed: 21319937
Trends Amplif. 2008 Jun;12(2):103-12
pubmed: 18567591
Psychol Rev. 1959 Mar;66(2):81-95
pubmed: 13645853
Trends Amplif. 2010 Jun;14(2):113-20
pubmed: 20724358
Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2004 Feb;36(1):29-40
pubmed: 15190697
J Acoust Soc Am. 2019 Jan;145(1):349
pubmed: 30710956
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Jun;55(3):824-37
pubmed: 22232401
J Am Acad Audiol. 2013 Sep;24(8):671-83
pubmed: 24131603
Trends Hear. 2018 Jan-Dec;22:2331216518800870
pubmed: 30311552
J Acoust Soc Am. 2009 Dec;126(6):3236-45
pubmed: 20000937
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005 Jun;48(3):651-67
pubmed: 16197279
J Acoust Soc Am. 2017 Aug;142(2):908
pubmed: 28863610
J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Oct;116(4 Pt 1):2311-23
pubmed: 15532662
Audiology. 2001 May-Jun;40(3):148-57
pubmed: 11465297
J Acoust Soc Am. 1988 Jun;83(6):2322-7
pubmed: 3411024
J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Feb;123(2):1063-76
pubmed: 18247908
J Am Acad Audiol. 2016 Jul;27(7):504-14
pubmed: 27406658
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Apr;55(2):474-86
pubmed: 22207696
Ear Hear. 2017 Mar/Apr;38(2):194-204
pubmed: 27749521
J Acoust Soc Am. 2007 Mar;121(3):1654-64
pubmed: 17407902
Ear Hear. 2005 Apr;26(2):120-31
pubmed: 15809540
Front Psychol. 2015 Dec 16;6:1894
pubmed: 26733899
J Acoust Soc Am. 2017 Jun;141(6):4452
pubmed: 28679277
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007 Oct;50(5):1123-38
pubmed: 17905900
Ear Hear. 1999 Feb;20(1):12-20
pubmed: 10037062
Scand Audiol. 1989;18(3):169-75
pubmed: 2814331
Trends Amplif. 2002 Dec;6(4):131-65
pubmed: 25425919
Int J Audiol. 2006 Mar;45(3):153-71
pubmed: 16579491
J Acoust Soc Am. 2006 Jan;119(1):41-4
pubmed: 16454262
J Am Acad Audiol. 2009 Mar;20(3):161-71
pubmed: 19927686
J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Aug;114(2):1023-34
pubmed: 12942981
Br J Audiol. 1988 May;22(2):93-104
pubmed: 3390637
Scand Audiol Suppl. 1978;(6):355-78
pubmed: 292148
J Acoust Soc Am. 1995 Dec;98(6):3182-7
pubmed: 8550942
J Acoust Soc Am. 1995 Feb;97(2):1224-40
pubmed: 7876444
Audiol Res. 2011 Mar 23;1(1):e24
pubmed: 26557309
J Acoust Soc Am. 1993 Jul;94(1):1-12
pubmed: 8354752