Effects of fast-acting high-frequency compression on the intelligibility of speech in steady and fluctuating background sounds

References

• Baer T, Moore B CJ. Effects of spectral smearing on the intelligibility of sentences in the presence of interfering speech. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95: 2277–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bench J, Bamford J. Speech-Hearing Tests and the Spoken Language of Hearing-Impaired Children. Academic, London 1979
   Google Scholar
• Boothroyd A. Developments in speech audiometry. Sound 1968; 2: 3–10
   Google Scholar
• Braida L D, Durlach N I, DeGennaro S V, Peterson P M, Bustamante D K. Review of recent research on multiband amplitude compression for the hearing impaired. The Vanderbilt Hearing-Aid Report, Upper Darby, GA. Studebaker, FH. Bess. Monographs in Contemporary Audiology, Pennsylvania 1982; 133–40
   Google Scholar
• Bustamante D K, Braida L D. Multiband compression limiting for hearing-impaired listeners. J Rehab Res Dev 1987; 24: 149–60
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Byrne D, Dillon H. The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear 1986; 7: 257–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon H. Compression?. Yes, but for low or high frequencies, for low or high intensities, and with what response times? Ear Hear 1996; 17: 287–307
   Google Scholar
• Dreschler W A, Verschuure J. Psychophysical evaluation of fast compression systems. Psychoacoustics, Speech and Hearing Aids, B Kollmeier. World Scientific, Singapore 1996; 183–91
   Google Scholar
• Duquesnoy A J, Plomp R. The effect of a hearing-aid on the speech-reception threshold of hearing-impaired listeners in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1983; 73: 2166–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Festen J M. Contributions of comodulation masking release and temporal resolution to the speech-reception threshold masked by an interfering voice. J Acoust Soc Am 1993; 94: 1295–300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Festen J M, Plomp R. Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 1990; 88: 1725–36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finney D J. Probit Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1971
   Google Scholar
• French N R, Steinberg J C. Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. J Acoust Soc Am 1947; 19: 90–119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: Evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 92: 1258–68
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goedegebure A, Hulshof M, Maas A JJ, Verschuure J. The effects of syllabic compression on speech intelligibility in hearing impaired. Psychoacoustics, Speech and Hearing Aids, B Kollmeier. World Scientific, Singapore 1996; 165–70
   Google Scholar
• Hickson L MH. Compression amplification in hearing aids. Am J Audiol 1994; 3: 51–65
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hohmann V, Kollmeier B. The effect of multichannel dynamic compression on speech intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 97: 1191–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hygge S, Rönnberg J, Larsby B, Arlinger S. Normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects' ability to just follow conversation in competing speech, reversed speech, and noise backgrounds. J Speech Hear Res 1992; 35: 208–15
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kollmeier B, Hohmann V. Loudness estimation and compensation employing a categorical scale. Advances in Hearing Research, GA. Manley, GM. Klump, C. Köppl, H. Fasti, H. Oeckinghaus. World Scientific Publishers, Singapore 1995; 441–51
   Google Scholar
• Laurence R F, Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R. A comparison of behind-the-ear high-fidelity linear aids and two-channel compression hearing aids in the laboratory and in everyday life. Brit J Audiol 1983; 17: 31–48
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levitt H. Speech discrimination ability in the hearing impaired: spectrum considerations. The Vanderbilt Hearing-Aid Report, Upper Darby, GA. Studebaker, F H Bess. Monographs in Contemporary Audiology, Pennsylvania 1982; 32–43
   Google Scholar
• Lippmann R P, Braida L D, Durlach N I. Study of multi-channel amplitude compression and linear amplification for persons with sensorineural hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 1981; 69: 524–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacLeod A, Summerfield Q. A procedure for measuring auditory and audio-visual speechreception thresholds for sentences in noise: rationale, evaluation, and recommendations for use. Brit J Audiol 1990; 24: 29–43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore B CJ. Design and evaluation of a two-channel compression hearing aid. J Rehab Res Dev 1987; 24: 181–92
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore B CJ. Signal processing to compensate for reduced dynamic range. Recent Developments in Hearing Instrument Technology, Kolding, J Beilin, G R Jensen. Danavox Foundation, Denmark 1993; 147–65
   Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ. Perceptual Consequences of Cochlear Damage. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1995
   Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R. A comparison of four methods of implementing automatic gain control (AGC) in hearing aids. Brit J Audiol 1988; 22: 93–104
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R. Simulation of the effects of loudness recruitment and threshold elevation on the intelligibility of speech in quiet and in a background of speech. J Acoust Soc Am 1993; 94: 2050–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R, Stone M A. Optimization of a slow-acting automatic gain control system for use in hearing aids. Brit J Audiol 1991; 25: 171–82
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R, Stone M A. Effect on the speech reception threshold in noise of the recovery time of the compressor in the high-frequency channel of a two-channel aid. Scand Audiol 1993, Suppl. 38: 82–91
   Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Glasberg B R, Vickers D A. Simulation of the effects of loudness recruitment on the intelligibility of speech in noise. Brit J Audiol 1995; 29: 131–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Johnson J S, Clark T M, Pluvinage V. Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 349–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B CJ, Laurence R F, Wright D. Improvements in speech intelligibility in quiet and in noise produced by two-channel compression hearing aids. Brit J Audiol 1985; 19: 175–87
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pearsons K S, Bennett R L, Fidell S. Speech Levels in Various Environments. Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1976, Report No. 3281
   Google Scholar
• Peters R W, Moore B CJ, Baer T. Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people. J Acoust Soc Am 1997, (submitted)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp R. A signal-to-noise ratio model for the speech-reception threshold of the hearing impaired. J Speech Hear Res 1986; 29: 146–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Plomp R. The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function. J Acoust Soc Am 1988; 83: 2322–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp R. Noise, amplification, and compression: Considerations of three main issues in hearing aid design. Ear Hear 1994; 15: 2–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinberg J C, Gardner M B. The dependency of hearing impairment on sound intensity. J Acoust Soc Am 1937; 9: 11–23
   Google Scholar
• Stone M A, Moore B CJ. Syllabic compression: Effective compression ratios for signals modulated at different rates. Brit J Audiol 1992; 26: 351–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ter Keurs M, Festen J M, Plomp R. Effect of spectral envelope smearing on speech reception. II. J Acoust Soc Am 1993; 93: 1547–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verschuure J, Dreschler W A. Dynamic compression in hearing aids. Psychoacoustics, Speech and Hearing Aids, B Kollmeier. World Scientific, Singapore 1996; 153–64
   Google Scholar
• Verschuure J, Prinsen T T, Dreschler W A. The effect of syllabic compression and frequency shaping on speech intelligibility in hearing impaired people. Ear Hear 1994; 15: 13–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villchur E. Signal processing to improve speech intelligibility in perceptive deafness. J Acoust Soc Am 1973; 53: 1646–57
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villchur E. The evaluation of amplitude-compression processing for hearing aids. The Vanderbilt Hearing-Aid Report, Upper Darby, G A Stude-baker, F H Bess. Monographs in Contemporary Audiology, Pennsylvania 1982; 141–3
   Google Scholar