Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 2, 2026

Author Spotlight: Optimizing EAS with Long Electrodes for Enhanced Cochlear Coverage and Hearing Preservation
Published on: October 11, 2024
The relationship between listening conditions and alternative amplification schemes for multiple memory hearing aids
1National Acoustic Laboratories, Chatswood, Australia.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to determine a relationship among selected listening conditions and amplification schemes that could be provided in a multiple memory hearing aid.
Design:
The study consisted of three laboratory tests: 1) A screening test to select hearing impaired subjects who appeared to benefit from multiple amplification schemes. 2) A category scaling test to rank 16 amplification schemes in 15 listening conditions. The 16 schemes were simulated with a digital master hearing aid and comprised 5 linear systems and 11 compression characteristics. The 15 listening conditions comprised 6 listening environments combined with 2 or 3 response criteria. 3) A paired comparison test in which the two highest ranked amplification schemes were evaluated together with a reference linear frequency response (NAL) in a round-robin test.
Results:
The screening test demonstrated that 21 hearing impaired people out of 25 with mild or moderate, flat or gently sloping hearing losses appeared to benefit from multiple amplification schemes. Age or audiometric factors did not serve to discriminate between those who selected different schemes and those who did not. In general, the NAL-response was preferred or was as good as any other for listening to speech in quiet, speech in reverberation, speech in babble-noise, and for naturalness of all listening environments. The subjects consistently selected an amplification scheme other than the NAL-response for four specific listening conditions. The findings suggest that substantial high-frequency compression is preferred for the ease of understanding multiple talkers, whose voices differ in overall level, in quiet environments. The annoyance of low-frequency background noise can be reduced by low-frequency compression, whereas a frequency response steeper than the NAL-response makes it easier to understand speech in low frequency background noise. Finally, a frequency response flatter than the NAL-response can be used to make a high-frequency background noise sound less annoying.
Conclusion:
Hearing aid users with mild or moderate, flat or gently sloping hearing losses, fitted with equal and sufficient variation in amplification, prefer different amplification schemes depending on the number of talkers, the background noise and the response criterion.
Related Concept Videos
Design Example: Vintage Mixing Console
The specifications for the pre-amplifier were clear. It needed to amplify the audio signal by a factor of 10, have an input impedance above 10...
Characteristics of Practical Op Amps
The ratio of differential gain to the common-mode gain is defined as the common-mode rejection ratio (CMRR). This ratio quantifies the ability of operational amplifiers (op-amps) to reject common-mode...
Cascaded Op Amps
In a cascaded system, each op-amp is referred to as a stage. The output of one stage drives the input of the subsequent stage. As the input signal passes through...
Hearing

