Left-right and front-back spatial hearing with multiple directional microphone configurations in modern hearing aids.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have demonstrated negative effects of directional microphone configurations on left-right and front-back (FB) sound localization. New processing schemes, such as frequency-dependent directionality and front focus with wireless ear-to-ear communication in recent, commercial hearing aids may preserve the binaural cues necessary for left-right localization and may introduce useful spectral cues necessary for FB disambiguation. PURPOSE: In this study, two hearing aids with different processing schemes, which were both designed to preserve the ability to localize sounds in the horizontal plane (left-right and FB), were compared. RESEARCH DESIGN: We compared horizontal (left-right and FB) sound localization performance of hearing aid users fitted with two types of behind-the-ear (BTE) devices. The first type of BTE device had four different programs that provided (1) no directionality, (2-3) symmetric frequency-dependent directionality, and (4) an asymmetric configuration. The second pair of BTE devices was evaluated in its omnidirectional setting. This setting automatically activates a soft forward-oriented directional scheme that mimics the pinna effect. Also, wireless communication between the hearing aids was present in this configuration (5). A broadband stimulus was used as a target signal. The directional hearing abilities of the listeners were also evaluated without hearing aids as a reference. STUDY SAMPLE: A total of 12 listeners with moderate to severe hearing loss participated in this study. All were experienced hearing-aid users. As a reference, 11 listeners with normal hearing participated. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The participants were positioned in a 13-speaker array (left-right, -90°/+90°) or 7-speaker array (FB, 0-180°) and were asked to report the number of the loudspeaker located the closest to where the sound was perceived. The root mean square error was calculated for the left-right experiment, and the percentage of FB errors was used as a FB performance measure. RESULTS were analyzed with repeated-measures analysis of variance. RESULTS: For the left-right localization task, no significant differences could be proven between the unaided condition and both partial directional schemes and the omnidirectional scheme. The soft forward-oriented system and the asymmetric system did show a detrimental effect compared with the unaided condition. On average, localization was worst when users used the asymmetric condition. Analysis of the results of the FB experiment showed good performance, similar to unaided, with both the partial directional systems and the asymmetric configuration. Significantly worse performance was found with the omnidirectional and the omnidirectional soft forward-oriented BTE systems compared with the other hearing-aid systems. CONCLUSIONS: Bilaterally fitted partial directional systems preserve (part of) the binaural cues necessary for left-right localization and introduce, preserve, or enhance useful spectral cues that allow FB disambiguation. Omnidirectional systems, although good for left-right localization, do not provide the user with enough spectral information for an optimal FB localization performance.

Sound source localization using hearing aids with microphones placed behind-the-ear, in-the-canal, and in-the-pinna.

OBJECTIVE: The effect of different commercial hearing aids on the ability to resolve front-back confusions and on sound localization in the frontal horizontal and vertical plane was studied. DESIGN: Commercial hearing aids with a microphone placed in-the-ear-canal (ITC), behind-the-ear (BTE), and in-the-pinna (ITP) were evaluated in the frontal and full horizontal plane, and in the frontal vertical plane. STUDY SAMPLE: A group of 13 hearing-impaired subjects evaluated the hearing aids. Nine normal-hearing listeners were used as a reference group. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Differences in sound localization in the front-back dimension were found for different hearing aids. A large inter-subject variability was found during the front-back and elevation experiments. With ITP or ITC microphones, almost all natural spectral information was preserved. One of the BTE hearing aids, which is equipped with a directional microphone configuration, generated a sufficient amount of spectral cues to allow front-back discrimination. No significant effect of hearing aids on elevation performance in the frontal vertical plane was observed. Hearing-impaired subjects reached the same performance with and without the different hearing aids. In the unaided condition, a frequency-specific audibility correction was applied. Some of the hearing-impaired listeners reached normal hearing performance with this correction.

Amplification of interaural level differences improves sound localization in acoustic simulations of bimodal hearing.

Users of a cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid are sensitive to interaural level differences (ILDs). However, when using their clinical devices, most of these subjects cannot use ILD cues for localization in the horizontal plane. This is partly due to a lack of high-frequency residual hearing in the acoustically stimulated ear. Using acoustic simulations of a cochlear implant and hearing loss, it is shown that localization performance can be improved by up to 14 degrees rms error relative to 48 degrees rms error for broadband noise by artificially introducing ILD cues in the low frequencies. The algorithm that was used for ILD introduction is described.

Sound localization, sound lateralization, and binaural masking level differences in young children with normal hearing.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, procedures for measuring sound localization, sound lateralization, and binaural masking level differences (BMLDs) in young children were developed. Sensitivity for these tasks was assessed in large groups of children between 4 and 9 yr of age to investigate potential developmental trends. DESIGN: Sound localization was measured in the sound field, with a broadband bell-ring presented from one of nine loudspeakers positioned in the frontal horizontal field. A group of 33 children between 4 and 6 yr of age and 5 adults took part in this experiment. Sound lateralization based on interaural time differences was measured with headphones in 49 children between 4 and 9 yr of age and 10 adults. A low-frequency stimulus containing harmonics 2 to 5 from a click train with a rate of 160 Hz was used. In the BMLD test, the same filtered click train was presented diotically or dichotically (phase reversed or time delayed) in a broadband (200 to 1000 Hz) frozen noise to 23 children between 4 and 6 yr of age and 10 adults. For comparison with literature, additional measurements with a 500-Hz sinusoid were administered to adults. All tasks were adapted to the interest and attention span of young children. RESULTS: Children of 5 yr of age did not perform significantly different from adults on the sound localization task, but mean absolute errors were larger for the 4-yr-olds. Also on the BMLD task, 5-yr-old children performed at the adult level, whereas the 4-yr-old children obtained significantly less binaural unmasking compared with the adults. Concerning sound lateralization, a small but significant difference between adults and children existed, but no age effects were apparent in the 4- to 9-yr-old group. Overall, the variation was relatively large in the 4-yr-old group, with some of the children performing at adult level, in all three tasks. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that the modified procedures are suitable for testing children from the age of 4 to 5 yr. Furthermore, it seems that binaural hearing capacities of the 5-yr-olds are similar to those of adults. Several observations led to the hypothesis that the observed age differences between 4-yr-olds and older subjects on localization and BMLD or between those 4- to 9-yr old and adults on lateralization, were attributable to both a development in binaural hearing and to nonauditory factors, such as task comprehension, attention, and testing conditions. It is possible that the developmental process is more obvious and prolonged in other aspects of binaural hearing, which require more dynamic or more central processing.

Speech enhancement with multichannel Wiener filter techniques in multimicrophone binaural hearing aids.

This paper evaluates speech enhancement in binaural multimicrophone hearing aids by noise reduction algorithms based on the multichannel Wiener filter (MWF) and the MWF with partial noise estimate (MWF-N). Both algorithms are specifically developed to combine noise reduction with the preservation of binaural cues. Objective and perceptual evaluations were performed with different speech-in-multitalker-babble configurations in two different acoustic environments. The main conclusions are as follows: (a) A bilateral MWF with perfect voice activity detection equals or outperforms a bilateral adaptive directional microphone in terms of speech enhancement while preserving the binaural cues of the speech component. (b) A significant gain in speech enhancement is found when transmitting one contralateral microphone signal to the MWF active at the ipsilateral hearing aid. Adding a second contralateral microphone showed a significant improvement during the objective evaluations but not in the subset of scenarios tested during the perceptual evaluations. (c) Adding the partial noise estimate to the MWF, done to improve the spatial awareness of the hearing aid user, reduces the amount of speech enhancement in a limited way. In some conditions the MWF-N even outperformed the MWF possibly due to an improved spatial release from masking.

The effect of multimicrophone noise reduction systems on sound source localization by users of binaural hearing aids.

This paper evaluates the influence of three multimicrophone noise reduction algorithms on the ability to localize sound sources. Two recently developed noise reduction techniques for binaural hearing aids were evaluated, namely, the binaural multichannel Wiener filter (MWF) and the binaural multichannel Wiener filter with partial noise estimate (MWF-N), together with a dual-monaural adaptive directional microphone (ADM), which is a widely used noise reduction approach in commercial hearing aids. The influence of the different algorithms on perceived sound source localization and their noise reduction performance was evaluated. It is shown that noise reduction algorithms can have a large influence on localization and that (a) the ADM only preserves localization in the forward direction over azimuths where limited or no noise reduction is obtained; (b) the MWF preserves localization of the target speech component but may distort localization of the noise component. The latter is dependent on signal-to-noise ratio and masking effects; (c) the MWF-N enables correct localization of both the speech and the noise components; (d) the statistical Wiener filter approach introduces a better combination of sound source localization and noise reduction performance than the ADM approach.

Horizontal localization with bilateral hearing aids: without is better than with.

This paper studies the effect of bilateral hearing aids on directional hearing in the frontal horizontal plane. Localization tests evaluated bilateral hearing aid users using different stimuli and different noise scenarios. Normal hearing subjects were used as a reference. The main research questions raised in this paper are: (i) How do bilateral hearing aid users perform on a localization task, relative to normal hearing subjects? (ii) Do bilateral hearing aids preserve localization cues, and (iii) Is there an influence of state of the art noise reduction algorithms, more in particular an adaptive directional microphone configuration, on localization performance? The hearing aid users were tested without and with their hearing aids, using both a standard omnidirectional microphone configuration and an adaptive directional microphone configuration. The following main conclusions are drawn. (i) Bilateral hearing aid users perform worse than normal hearing subjects in a localization task, although more than one-half of the subjects reach normal hearing performance when tested unaided. For both groups, localization performance drops significantly when acoustical scenarios become more complex. (ii) Bilateral, i.e., independently operating hearing aids do not preserve localization cues. (iii) Overall, adaptive directional noise reduction can have an additional and significant negative impact on localization performance.