(Why) Do Transparent Hearing Devices Impair Speech Perception in Collocated Noise?

Hearing aids and other hearing devices should provide the user with a benefit, for example, compensate for effects of a hearing loss or cancel undesired sounds. However, wearing hearing devices can also have negative effects on perception, previously demonstrated mostly for spatial hearing, sound quality and the perception of the own voice. When hearing devices are set to transparency, that is, provide no gain and resemble open-ear listening as well as possible, these side effects can be studied in isolation. In the present work, we conducted a series of experiments that are concerned with the effect of transparent hearing devices on speech perception in a collocated speech-in-noise task. In such a situation, listening through a hearing device is not expected to have any negative effect, since both speech and noise undergo identical processing, such that the signal-to-noise ratio at ear is not altered and spatial effects are irrelevant. However, we found a consistent hearing device disadvantage for speech intelligibility and similar trends for rated listening effort. Several hypotheses for the possible origin for this disadvantage were tested by including several different devices, gain settings and stimulus levels. While effects of self-noise and nonlinear distortions were ruled out, the exact reason for a hearing device disadvantage on speech perception is still unclear. However, a significant relation to auditory model predictions demonstrate that the speech intelligibility disadvantage is related to sound quality, and is most probably caused by insufficient equalization, artifacts of frequency-dependent signal processing and processing delays.

Auditory Spatial Bisection of Blind and Normally Sighted Individuals in Free Field and Virtual Acoustics.

Sound localization is an important ability in everyday life. This study investigates the influence of vision and presentation mode on auditory spatial bisection performance. Subjects were asked to identify the smaller perceived distance between three consecutive stimuli that were either presented via loudspeakers (free field) or via headphones after convolution with generic head-related impulse responses (binaural reproduction). Thirteen azimuthal sound incidence angles on a circular arc segment of ±24° at a radius of 3 m were included in three regions of space (front, rear, and laterally left). Twenty normally sighted (measured both sighted and blindfolded) and eight blind persons participated. Results showed no significant differences with respect to visual condition, but strong effects of sound direction and presentation mode. Psychometric functions were steepest in frontal space and indicated median spatial bisection thresholds of 11°-14°. Thresholds increased significantly in rear (11°-17°) and laterally left (20°-28°) space in free field. Individual pinna and torso cues, as available only in free field presentation, improved the performance of all participants compared to binaural reproduction. Especially in rear space, auditory spatial bisection thresholds were three to four times higher (i.e., poorer) using binaural reproduction than in free field. The results underline the importance of individual auditory spatial cues for spatial bisection, irrespective of access to vision, which indicates that vision may not be strictly necessary to calibrate allocentric spatial hearing.

Occlusion and coupling effects with different earmold designs - all a matter of opening the ear canal?

OBJECTIVE: Ear canal occlusion by a hearing aid leads to an unnatural sound of the own voice due to a level increase of bone-conducted low-frequency components of the ear canal. Opening the ear through vents or domes reduces this so-called occlusion effect, however at the cost of reduced hearing aid performance. For individual earmolds, several other design options to reduce the occlusion effect have been proposed but not reliably evaluated. DESIGN: The occlusion effect and coupling parameters were assessed through subjective ratings and real-ear measurements. STUDY SAMPLE: Six individual earmold designs, each with different venting options, were tested in 10 subjects. RESULTS: In line with previous studies, our data show that the opening of the ear as described by the acoustic mass of the vent is the prime parameter that predicts both the occlusion effect and coupling parameters. However, the design of the earmold, most importantly the location where sealing of the ear canal is achieved, is another important factor for occlusion and coupling effects. CONCLUSIONS: Although no reduction of the occlusion effect seems possible without additional opening of the ear canal, some earmold modifications seem to aggravate the occlusion effect as compared to a standard earmold with equivalent vent.

The "Missing 6 dB" Revisited: Influence of Room Acoustics and Binaural Parameters on the Loudness Mismatch Between Headphones and Loudspeakers.

Generations of researchers observed a mismatch between headphone and loudspeaker presentation: the sound pressure level at the eardrum generated by a headphone has to be about 6 dB higher compared to the level created by a loudspeaker that elicits the same loudness. While it has been shown that this effect vanishes if the same waveforms are generated at the eardrum in a blind comparison, the origin of the mismatch is still unclear. We present new data on the issue that systematically characterize this mismatch under variation of the stimulus frequency, presentation room, and binaural parameters of the headphone presentation. Subjects adjusted the playback level of a headphone presentation to equal loudness as loudspeaker presentation, and the levels at the eardrum were determined through appropriate transfer function measurements. Identical experiments were conducted at Oldenburg and Aachen with 40 normal-hearing subjects including 14 that passed through both sites. Our data verify a mismatch between loudspeaker and binaural headphone presentation, especially at low frequencies. This mismatch depends on the room acoustics, and on the interaural coherence in both presentation modes. It vanishes for high frequencies and broadband signals if individual differences in the sound transfer to the eardrums are accounted for. Moreover, small acoustic and non-acoustic differences in an anechoic reference environment (Oldenburg vs. Aachen) exert a large effect on the recorded loudness mismatch, whereas not such a large effect of the respective room is observed across moderately reverberant rooms at both sites. Hence, the non-conclusive findings from the literature appear to be related to the experienced disparity between headphone and loudspeaker presentation, where even small differences in (anechoic) room acoustics significantly change the response behavior of the subjects. Moreover, individual factors like loudness summation appear to be only loosely connected to the observed mismatch, i.e., no direct prediction is possible from individual binaural loudness summation to the observed mismatch. These findings - even though not completely explainable by the yet limited amount of parameter variations performed in this study - have consequences for the comparability of experiments using loudspeakers with conditions employing headphones or other ear-level hearing devices.

Instrumental Quality Predictions and Analysis of Auditory Cues for Algorithms in Modern Headphone Technology.

Smart headphones or hearables use different types of algorithms such as noise cancelation, feedback suppression, and sound pressure equalization to eliminate undesired sound sources or to achieve acoustical transparency. Such signal processing strategies might alter the spectral composition or interaural differences of the original sound, which might be perceived by listeners as monaural or binaural distortions and thus degrade audio quality. To evaluate the perceptual impact of these distortions, subjective quality ratings can be used, but these are time consuming and costly. Auditory-inspired instrumental quality measures can be applied with less effort and may also be helpful in identifying whether the distortions impair the auditory representation of monaural or binaural cues. Therefore, the goals of this study were (a) to assess the applicability of various monaural and binaural audio quality models to distortions typically occurring in hearables and (b) to examine the effect of those distortions on the auditory representation of spectral, temporal, and binaural cues. Results showed that the signal processing algorithms considered in this study mainly impaired (monaural) spectral cues. Consequently, monaural audio quality models that capture spectral distortions achieved the best prediction performance. A recent audio quality model that predicts monaural and binaural aspects of quality was revised based on parts of the current data involving binaural audio quality aspects, leading to improved overall performance indicated by a mean Pearson linear correlation of 0.89 between obtained and predicted ratings.

Detection mechanisms for processing delays in simulated vented hearing devices.

Processing delays are a disturbing factor in hearing devices, especially with vented or open fits. While the disturbance due to delays is well characterized, neither have the perception thresholds of delays been systematically assessed, nor are the perceptual detection mechanisms clear. This study presents experiments determining the delay detection thresholds in simulated linear vented hearing devices in normal-hearing listeners, where spectral effects of delays were either compensated or not. Furthermore, the psychometric function for the detection of delays was determined for an example condition and linked to model predictions, showing that delay detection can be well predicted from spectral artefacts.

On the limitations of sound localization with hearing devices.

Limited abilities to localize sound sources and other reduced spatial hearing capabilities remain a largely unsolved issue in hearing devices like hearing aids or hear-through headphones. Hence, the impact of the microphone location, signal bandwidth, different equalization approaches, as well as processing delays in superposition with direct sound leaking through a vent was addressed in this study. A localization experiment was performed with normal-hearing subjects using individual binaural synthesis to separately assess the above-mentioned potential limiting issues for localization in the horizontal and vertical plane with linear hearing devices. To this end, listening through hearing devices was simulated utilizing transfer functions for six different microphone locations, measured both individually and on a dummy head. Results show that the microphone location is the governing factor for localization abilities with linear hearing devices, and non-optimal microphone locations have a disruptive influence on localization in the vertical domain, and an effect on lateral sound localization. Processing delays cause additional detrimental effects for lateral sound localization; and diffuse-field equalization to the open-ear response leads to better localization performance than free-field equalization. Stimuli derived from dummy head measurements are unsuited for evaluating individual localization abilities with a hearing device.

Spectral directional cues captured by hearing device microphones in individual human ears.

Spatial hearing abilities with hearing devices ultimately depend on how well acoustic directional cues are captured by the microphone(s) of the device. A comprehensive objective evaluation of monaural spectral directional cues captured at 9 microphone locations integrated in 5 hearing device styles is presented, utilizing a recent database of head-related transfer functions (HRTFs) that includes data from 16 human and 3 artificial ear pairs. Differences between HRTFs to the eardrum and hearing device microphones were assessed by descriptive analyses and quantitative metrics, and compared to differences between individual ears. Directional information exploited for vertical sound localization was evaluated by means of computational models. Directional information at microphone locations inside the pinna is significantly biased and qualitatively poorer compared to locations in the ear canal; behind-the-ear microphones capture almost no directional cues. These errors are expected to impair vertical sound localization, even if the new cues would be optimally mapped to locations. Differences between HRTFs to the eardrum and hearing device microphones are qualitatively different from between-subject differences and can be described as a partial destruction rather than an alteration of relevant cues, although spectral difference metrics produce similar results. Dummy heads do not fully reflect the results with individual subjects.

Event-Related Potentials Measured From In and Around the Ear Electrodes Integrated in a Live Hearing Device for Monitoring Sound Perception.

Future hearing devices could exploit brain signals of the user derived from electroencephalography (EEG) measurements, for example, for fitting the device or steering signal enhancement algorithms. While previous studies have shown that meaningful brain signals can be obtained from ear-centered EEG electrodes, we here present a feasibility study where ear-EEG is integrated with a live hearing device. Seventeen normal-hearing participants were equipped with an individualized in-the-ear hearing device and an ear-EEG system that included 10 electrodes placed around the ear (cEEGrid) and 3 electrodes spread out in the concha. They performed an auditory discrimination experiment, where they had to detect an audible switch in the signal processing settings of the hearing device between repeated presentations of otherwise identical stimuli. We studied two aspects of the ear-EEG data: First, whether the switches in the hearing device settings can be identified in the brain signals, specifically event-related potentials. Second, we evaluated the signal quality for the individual electrode positions. The EEG analysis revealed significant differences between trials with and without a switch in the device settings in the N100 and P300 range of the event-related potential. The comparison of electrode positions showed that the signal quality is better for around-the-ear electrodes than for in-concha electrodes. These results confirm that meaningful brain signals related to the settings of a hearing device can be acquired from ear-EEG during real-time audio processing, particularly if electrodes around the ear are available.

Adapting Hearing Devices to the Individual Ear Acoustics: Database and Target Response Correction Functions for Various Device Styles.

To achieve a natural sound quality when listening through hearing devices, the sound pressure at the eardrum should replicate that of the open ear, modified only by an insertion gain if desired. A target approximating this reference condition can be computed by applying an appropriate correction function to the pressure observed at the device microphone. Such Target Response Correction Functions (TRCF) can be defined based on the directionally dependent relative transfer function between the location of the hearing device microphone and the eardrum of the open ear. However, it is unclear how exactly the TRCF should be derived, and how large the benefit of individual, versus generic, correction is. We present measurements of Head-Related Transfer Functions (HRTF) at the eardrum and at 9 microphone locations of a comprehensive set of 5 hearing device styles, including 91 incidence directions, and recorded in 16 subjects and 2 dummy heads. Based on these HRTFs, individualized and generic TRCF were computed for frontal (referred to as free-field) and diffuse-field sound incidence. Spectral deviations between the computed target and listening with the open ear were evaluated using an auditory model and virtual acoustic scenes. Results indicate that a correction for diffuse-field incidence should be preferred over the free field, and individual correction functions result in notably reduced spectral deviations to open-ear listening, as compared with generic correction functions. These outcomes depend substantially on the specific device style. The HRTF database and derived TRCFs are publicly available.

An individualised acoustically transparent earpiece for hearing devices.

OBJECTIVE: An important and often still unresolved problem of hearing devices such as assistive listening devices and hearing aids is limited user acceptance - a primary reason is poor conservation quality of the acoustic environment. Approaching a possible solution to this problem, an earpiece prototype is presented and evaluated. The prototype is individually and automatically calibrated in situ to provide acoustical transparency, i.e., achieving an audio perception alike to the open ear. DESIGN: A comprehensive evaluation was performed, comprising technical measurements on an advanced dummy head and listening tests, in which listeners directly compared sound perception through the prototype and a simulated open ear canal reference. STUDY SAMPLE: Ten normal hearing subjects, including five expert listeners, participated in the listening test. RESULTS: The technical evaluation verified good achievement of acoustical transparency. The psychoacoustic results showed that a reliable distinction between the two conditions presented was not possible for relevant communication sounds. CONCLUSION: The prototype can be described as an initial realisation of an acoustically transparent hearing system, i.e. a device that does not disturb the perception of external sounds. In further developments, the device can be considered as the basis for systems integrating high sound quality, hearing support and other desired modifications.