Virtual acoustic environments for comprehensive evaluation of model-based hearing devices ^*

References

• Ahrens, J. & Spors, S. 2008. An analytical approach to sound field reproduction using circular and spherical loudspeaker distributions. Acta Acust United Ac, 94, 988–999.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjamin, E., Heller, A. & Lee, R. 2010. Why ambisonics does work. Audio Engineering Society Convention. San Francisco, CA, USA. 129.
   Google Scholar
• Bentler, R.A. 2005. Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: A systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol, 16, 473–484.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bertet, S., Daniel, J., Parizet, E. & Warusfel, O. 2013. Investigation on localisation accuracy for first and higher order ambisonics reproduced sound sources. Acta Acust United Ac, 99, 642–657.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Best, V., Keidser, G., Buchholz, J.M. & Freeston, K. 2015. An examination of speech reception thresholds measured in a simulated reverberant cafeteria environment. Int J Audiol, 54, 682–690.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronkhorst, A.W. & Houtgast, T. 1999. Auditory distance perception in rooms. Nature, 397, 517–520.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson, K. 2004. Objective Localisation Measures in Ambisonic Surround-sound. York: Department of Music Technology, University of York.
   Google Scholar
• Cord, M., Surr, R., Walden, B. & Dyrlund, O. 2004. Relationship between laboratory measures of directional advantage and everyday success with directional microphone hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol, 15, 353–364.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Daniel, J. 2001. Représentation de champs acoustiques, application à la transmission et à la reproduction de scènes sonores complexes dans un contexte multimédia [PhD thesis]. Paris: Université Pierre et Marie Curie (Paris VI).
   Google Scholar
• Daniel, J., Nicol, R. & Moreau, S. 2003. Further investigations of high-order ambisonics and wavefield synthesis for holophonic sound imaging. Audio Engineering Society Convention. 114
   Google Scholar
• Grimm, G., Herzke, T., Berg, D. & Hohmann, V. 2006. The master hearing aid – A PC-based platform for algorithm development and evaluation. Acta Acust United Ac, 92, 618–628.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimm, G., Ewert, S. & Hohmann, V. 2015a. Evaluation of spatial audio reproduction schemes for application in hearing aid research. Acta Acust United Ac, 101, 841–854.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimm, G., Heeren, J. & Hohmann, V. 2015b. Comparison of distance perception in simulated and real rooms. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spatial Audio; Graz.
   Google Scholar
• Grimm, G., Luberadzka, J., Herzke, T. & Hohmann, V. 2015c. Toolbox for acoustic scene creation and rendering (TASCAR): Render methods and research applications. In: Neumann, F. (ed.) Proceedings of the Linux Audio Conference; Mainz, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Grimm, G., Kollmeier, B. & Hohmann, V. 2016. Spatial acoustic scenarios in multichannel loudspeaker systems for hearing aid evaluation. J Am Acad Audiol, 27, 557–566.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamacher, V., Chalupper, J., Eggers, J., Fischer, E., Kornagel, U., et al. 2005. Signal processing in high-end hearing aids: State of the art, challenges, and future trends. EURASIP J Appl Signal Process, 2005, 2915–2929.
   Google Scholar
• Holube, I., Fredelake, S., Vlaming, M. & Kollmeier, B. 2010. Development and analysis of an international speech test signal (ISTS). Int J Audiol, 49, 891–903.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kortlang, S., Ewert, S., Meister, H., Rählmann, S., Kießling, J., et al. Combination of controlled laboratory tests and structured field trials for a comprehensive evaluation of a model-based hearing aid. Int J Audiol 2016 [Submitted].
   Google Scholar
• Landone, C. & Sandler, M. 1999. Issues in performance prediction of surround systems in sound reinforcement applications. Proceedings of the 2nd COST G-6 Workshop on Digital Audio Effects (DAFx99); Trondheim, Norway: Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Oreinos, C. & Buchholz, J.M. 2015. Objective analysis of ambisonics for hearing aid applications: Effect of listener's head, room reverberation, and directional microphones. J Acoust Soc Am, 137, 3447–3465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pulkki, V. 1997. Virtual sound source positioning using vector base amplitude panning. J Audio Eng Soc, 45, 456–466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pulkki, V. & Hirvonen, T. 2005. Localization of virtual sources in multichannel audio reproduction. Speech Audio Process IEEE Trans, 13, 105–119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricketts, T. 2000. Impact of noise source configuration on directional hearing aid benefit and performance. Ear Hear, 21, 194–205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Völker, C., Grimm, G., Vormann, M., Hohmann, V., Kollmeier, B., et al. How to derive the best parameter combination for complex hearing aid algorithms? – Prototypic evaluation of a binaural coherence-based noise reduction algorithm. Int J Audiol 2016 [Submitted].
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagener, K.C., Hansen, M. & Ludvigsen, C. 2008. Recording and classification of the acoustic environment of hearing aid users. J Am Acad Audiol, 19, 348–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittkop, T. & Hohmann, V. 2003. Strategy-selective noise reduction for binaural digital hearing aids. Speech Commun, 39, 111–138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar