Quality ratings of frequency-compressed speech by participants with extensive high-frequency dead regions in the cochlea

Marina Salorio-Corbetto, Thomas Baer, Brian C J Moore, Marina Salorio-Corbetto, Thomas Baer, Brian C J Moore

Abstract

Objective: The objective was to assess the degradation of speech sound quality produced by frequency compression for listeners with extensive high-frequency dead regions (DRs).

Design: Quality ratings were obtained using values of the starting frequency (Sf) of the frequency compression both below and above the estimated edge frequency, fe, of each DR. Thus, the value of Sf often fell below the lowest value currently used in clinical practice. Several compression ratios were used for each value of Sf. Stimuli were sentences processed via a prototype hearing aid based on Phonak Exélia Art P.

Study sample: Five participants (eight ears) with extensive high-frequency DRs were tested.

Results: Reductions of sound-quality produced by frequency compression were small to moderate. Ratings decreased significantly with decreasing Sf and increasing CR. The mean ratings were lowest for the lowest Sf and highest CR. Ratings varied across participants, with one participant rating frequency compression lower than no frequency compression even when Sf was above fe.

Conclusions: Frequency compression degraded sound quality somewhat for this small group of participants with extensive high-frequency DRs. The degradation was greater for lower values of Sf relative to fe, and for greater values of CR. Results varied across participants.

Keywords: Frequency compression; dead regions; hearing aids; sound quality.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Input/output function for a frequency-compression hearing aid with Sf = 1 kHz and CR = 2. Frequency components below Sf remain unchanged. In this example, the high-frequency edge of the source band, Ef, is 4 kHz. The width of the source band in octaves is 3.32log10(Ef/Sf), which is 2 octaves. The width of the destination band is 3.32log10(Ef/Sf)/CR, which is 1 octave. Thus, its upper edge falls at 2 kHz.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Air-conduction audiograms of the ears tested. Open circles and crosses indicate thresholds for the right and left ears, respectively. Down-pointing arrows indicate that the participant did not respond at the highest level tested.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
TEN(HL) test results. Audiometric thresholds measured as part of this test are shown using the same symbols as for Figure 2. When the audiometric threshold was higher than the maximum tone level of 104 dB HL, the threshold is not shown. The level of the TEN(HL) in dB/ERBN is shown by the dashed lines without symbols. The masked thresholds of the tone in the TEN(HL) are shown by open squares. Downward-pointing arrows mean that the participant did not detect the tone at the level indicated. Shaded areas indicate frequencies where the outcome of the test was positive. Cross-hatched areas indicate frequencies where the outcome was inconclusive.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Examples of PTCs. The signal frequency and level are denoted by an open star. The dotted line shows the masker levels visited, and the continuous line shows the combination of an upward-sweep and a downward-sweep run, after smoothing each of them. The frequency at the tip of each PTC (the MMF) is indicated in each panel. The MMF was taken as the estimate of fe.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Fast PTCs for P5L. For fs = 1.3 kHz, the tip was shifted to 1 kHz. For fs = 3  and 3.5 kHz, the tips were shifted to 2.9 and 2.8 kHz, respectively. See the text for a discussion of these results.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Mean quality ratings for P1R, P2R, P2L and P3R for each frequency-compression condition and for the control condition (C), plotted separately for each talker. Values of Sf and CR are shown at the top and bottom, respectively. Each row represents one ear. The error bars represent ±1 SD of the ratings after correction for order effects. For each ear, the leftmost panel shows the mean corrected ratings for the control condition when the reference stimulus was compared with itself, for the male talker (M) and the female talker (F). 95% confidence intervals were calculated from these ratings. Stars indicate that the mean ratings for a given frequency-compression condition were outside the 95% confidence intervals for the control condition.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
As Figure 6, but for P3L, P5R, P5L and P7L.

References

    1. Alexander J.M. Individual variability in recognition of frequency-lowered speech. Sem Hear. 2013;34:83–109.
    1. Alexander J.M. Nonlinear frequency compression: Influence of start frequency and input bandwidth on consonant and vowel recognition. J Acoust Soc Am. 2016;139:938–957.
    1. Alexander J.M., Kopun J.G., Stelmachowicz P.G. Effects of frequency compression and frequency transposition on fricative and affricate perception in listeners with normal hearing and mild to moderate hearing loss. Ear Hear. 2014;35:519–532.
    1. ANSI 1997Methods for the Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index
    1. Baer T., Moore B.C.J., Kluk K. Effects of lowpass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002;112:1133–1144.
    1. Bench J., Kowal A., Bamford J. The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol. 1979;13:108–112.
    1. Bertoli S., Staehelin K., Zemp E., Schindler C., Bodmer D., et al. Survey on hearing aid use and satisfaction in Switzerland and their determinants. Int J Audiol. 2009;48:183–195.
    1. Bohnert A., Nyffeler M., Keilmann A. Advantages of a non-linear frequency compression algorithm in noise. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2010;267:1045–1053.
    1. Brennan M.A., McCreery R., Kopun J., Hoover B., Alexander J., et al. Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol. 2014;25:983–998.
    1. British Society of Audiology. Recommended procedure for tympanometry. Br J Audiol. 1992;26:255–257.
    1. British Society of Audiology. Reading, UK: British Society of Audiology; 2011.
    1. Ellis R.J., Munro K.J. Benefit from, and acclimatization to, frequency compression hearing aids in experienced adult hearing-aid users. Int J Audiol. 2015;54:37–47.
    1. Füllgrabe C., Baer T., Stone M.A., Moore B.C.J. Preliminary evaluation of a method for fitting hearing aids with extended bandwidth. Int J Audiol. 2010;49:741–753.
    1. Gifford R.H., Dorman M.F., Spahr A.J., McKarns S.A. Effect of digital frequency compression (DFC) on speech recognition in candidates for combined electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS) J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007;50:1194–1202.
    1. Glasberg B.R., Moore B.C.J. Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data. Hear Res. 1990;47:103–138.
    1. Glista D., Scollie S., Bagatto M., Seewald R., Parsa V., et al. Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression: Clinical outcomes. Int J Audiol. 2009;48:632–644.
    1. Hillock-Dunn A., Buss E., Duncan N., Roush P.A., Leibold L. Effects of nonlinear frequency compression on speech identification in children with hearing loss. Ear Hear. 2014;35:353–365.
    1. Hopkins K., Khanom M., Dickinson A.M., Munro K.J. Benefit from non-linear frequency compression hearing aids in a clinical setting: The effects of duration of experience and severity of high-frequency hearing loss. Int J Audiol. 2014;53:219–228.
    1. Huss M., Moore B.C.J. Dead regions and noisiness of pure tones. Int J Audiol. 2005a;44:599–611.
    1. Huss M., Moore B.C.J. Dead regions and pitch perception. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005b;117:3841–3852.
    1. John A., Wolfe J., Scollie S., Schafer E., Hudson M., et al. Evaluation of wideband frequency responses and nonlinear frequency compression for children with cookie-bite audiometric configurations. J Am Acad Audiol. 2014;25:1022–1033.
    1. Johnson E.E., Light K.C. A patient-centered, provided-facilitated approach to the refinement of nonlinear frequency compression parameters based on subjective preference rating of amplified sound quality. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015;26:689–702.
    1. Kluk K., Moore B.C.J. Factors affecting psychophysical tuning curves for hearing-impaired subjects with high-frequency dead regions. Hear Res. 2005;200:115–131.
    1. Kochkin S. MarkeTrak V: “Why my hearing aids are in the drawer”: The consumers’ perspective. Hear J. 2000;53:34–42.
    1. Kokx-Ryan M., Cohen J., Cord M.T., Walden T.C., Makashay M.J., et al. Benefits of nonlinear frequency compression in adult hearing aid users. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015;26:838–855.
    1. Malicka A.N., Munro K.J., Baer T., Baker R.J., Moore B.C.J. The effect of low-pass filtering on identification of nonsense syllables in quiet by school-age children with and without cochlear dead regions. Ear Hear. 2013;34:458–469.
    1. McCreery R., Alexander J., Brennan M., Hoover B., Kopun J., et al. The influence of audibility on speech recognition with nonlinear frequency compression for children and adults with hearing loss. Ear Hear. 2014;35:440–447.
    1. McCreery R.W., Brennan M.A., Hoover B., Kopun J., Stelmachowicz P.G. Maximizing audibility and speech recognition with nonlinear frequency compression by estimating audible bandwidth. Ear Hear. 2013;34:e24–e27.
    1. Miller C.W., Bates E., Brennan M. The effect of frequency lowering on speech perception in noise with adult hearing-aid users. Int J Audiol. 2016;55:305–312.
    1. Moore B.C.J. Dead regions in the cochlea: Diagnosis, perceptual consequences, and implications for the fitting of hearing aids. Trends Amplif. 2001;5:1–34.
    1. Moore B.C.J. Dead regions in the cochlea: Conceptual foundations, diagnosis, and clinical applications. Ear Hear. 2004;25:98–116.
    1. Moore B.C.J. Auditory Processing of Temporal Fine Structure: Effects of Age and Hearing Loss. Singapore: World Scientific; 2014.
    1. Moore B.C.J., Glasberg B.R., Stone M.A. New version of the TEN test with calibrations in dB HL. Ear Hear. 2004;25:478–487.
    1. Moore B.C.J., Glasberg B.R., Stone M.A. Development of a new method for deriving initial fittings for hearing aids with multi-channel compression: CAMEQ2-HF. Int J Audiol. 2010;49:216–227.
    1. Moore B.C.J., Malicka A.N. Cochlear dead regions in adults and children: Diagnosis and clinical implications. Semin Hear. 2013;34:37–50.
    1. Moore B.C.J., Sek A. Comparison of the CAM2A and NAL-NL2 hearing-aid fitting methods for participants with a wide range of hearing losses. Int J Audiol. 2016;55:93–100.
    1. Moore B.C.J., Stone M.A., Füllgrabe C., Glasberg B.R., Puria S. Spectro-temporal characteristics of speech at high frequencies, and the potential for restoration of audibility to people with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. Ear Hear. 2008;29:907–922.
    1. Mussoi B.S.S., Bentler R.A. Impact of frequency compression on music perception. Int J Audiol. 2015;54:627–633.
    1. Myers J., Malicka A.N. Clinical feasibility of fast psychophysical tuning curves evaluated using normally hearing adults: Success rate, range of tip shift, repeatability, and comparison of methods used for estimation of frequency at the tip. Int J Audiol. 2014;53:887–894.
    1. Park L.R., Teagle H.F., Buss E., Roush P.A., Buchman C.A. Effects of frequency compression hearing aids for unilaterally implanted children with acoustically amplified residual hearing in the nonimplanted ear. Ear Hear. 2012;33:e1–e12.
    1. Parsa V., Scollie S., Glista D., Seelisch A. Nonlinear frequency compression: Effects on sound quality ratings of speech and music. Trends Amplif. 2013;17:54–68.
    1. Pepler A., Munro K.J., Lewis K., Kluk K. Prevalence of cochlear dead regions in new referrals and existing adult hearing aid users. Ear Hear. 2014;35:e99–e109.
    1. Peterson G.E., Barney H.L. Control methods used in a study of the vowels. J Acoust Soc Am. 1952;24:175–184.
    1. Perreau A.E., Bentler R.A., Tyler R.S. The contribution of a frequency-compression hearing aid to contralateral cochlear implant performance. J Am Acad Audiol. 2013;24:105–120.
    1. Picou E.M., Marcrum S.C., Ricketts T.A. Evaluation of the effects of nonlinear frequency compression on speech recognition and sound quality for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss. Int J Audiol. 2015;54:162–169.
    1. Plomp R. Detectability threshold for combination tones. J Acoust Soc Am. 1965;37:1110–1123.
    1. Posen M.P., Reed C.M., Braida L.D. Intelligibility of frequency-lowered speech produced by a channel vocoder. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1993;30:26–38.
    1. Robinson J., Baer T., Moore B.C.J. Using transposition to improve consonant discrimination and detection for listeners with severe high-frequency hearing loss. Int J Audiol. 2007;46:293–308.
    1. Robinson J., Stainsby T.H., Baer T., Moore B.C.J. Evaluation of a frequency transposition algorithm using wearable hearing aids. Int J Audiol. 2009;48:384–393.
    1. Sek A., Alcántara J.I., Moore B.C.J., Kluk K., Wicher A. Development of a fast method for determining psychophysical tuning curves. Int J Audiol. 2005;44:408–420.
    1. Sek A., Moore B.C.J. Implementation of a fast method for measuring psychophysical tuning curves. Int J Audiol. 2011;50:237–242.
    1. Simpson A., Hersbach A.A., McDermott H.J. Improvements in speech perception with an experimental nonlinear frequency compression hearing device. Int J Audiol. 2005;44:281–292.
    1. Simpson A., Hersbach A.A., McDermott H.J. Frequency-compression outcomes in listeners with steeply sloping audiograms. Int J Audiol. 2006;45:619–629.
    1. Souza P., Arehart K.H., Kates J.M., Croghan N.B., Gehani N. Exploring the limits of frequency lowering. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2013;56:1349–1363.
    1. Verschuure J., Prinsen T.T., Dreschler W.A. The effects of syllabic compression and frequency shaping on speech intelligibility in hearing impaired people. Ear Hear. 1994;15:13–21.
    1. Vickers D.A., Moore B.C.J., Baer T. Effects of lowpass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001;110:1164–1175.
    1. Wolfe J., John A., Schafer E., Hudson M., Boretzki M., et al. Evaluation of wideband frequency responses and non-linear frequency compression for children with mild to moderate high-frequency hearing loss. Int J Audiol. 2015;54:170–181.
    1. Wolfe J., John A., Schafer E., Nyffeler M., Boretzki M., et al. Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression for school-age children with moderate to moderately severe hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol. 2010;21:618–628.
    1. Wolfe J., John A., Schafer E., Nyffeler M., Boretzki M., et al. Long-term effects of non-linear frequency compression for children with moderate hearing loss. Int J Audiol. 2011;50:396–404.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera