Linear Frequency Transposition - Extending The Audibility OfHigh-Frequency Information - Hearing Review

3/19/2015
LinearFrequencyTransposition:ExtendingtheAudibilityofHighFrequencyInformationHearingReview
NEWS
PRODUCTS
BUYER'S GUIDE
DIGITAL EDITION
PRACTICE MANAGEMENT
RESOURCES
What are you looking for?
Linear Frequency Transposition:

Extending the Audibility ofHighFrequency Information
Published on October 8, 2006

People with a precipitous high frequency hearing loss often miss the high
frequency information even when they wear hearing aids. Sometimes it is
because the high frequency gain available on the hearing aid is not sufficient to
reach audibility before feedback occurs; sometimes the severity of the hearing
loss in the high frequency region is so great that it is unaidable or dead from
the complete depletion of inner hair cells.
In the former case, audibility may be achievable at the expense of a smaller
vent diameter on the hearing aid. This could compromise wearer comfort
because of an increase in the occlusion effect.1 In the latter case, acoustic
stimulation of the unaidable region may decrease further the already depressed
speech understanding.2 The loss of audibility of high frequency sounds often
compromises speech understanding and the appreciation of music and
natures sounds (such as bird songs).
http://www.hearingreview.com/2006/10/linearfrequencytranspositionextendingtheaudibilityofhighfrequencyinformation/
1/15
3/19/2015
What is Frequency Lowering?

One of the earlier attempts to achieve audibility for high frequency sounds is
the use of frequency lowering techniques. These are simply nonlinear
operations in which high frequency sounds are moved to a lower frequency
region. When these techniques are applied to hearing aids, the objective is to
provide audibility of the unaidable high frequency cues by changing them into
an audible lower frequency substitute. The target beneficiaries of this technique
are people with a severe-to-profound loss in the high frequencies who cannot
benefit from conventional amplification.
This article was submitted
to HR by Francis Kuk, PhD,
director of audiology, and
research audiologists Petri
Korhonen, MSc, Heidi
Peeters, MA, and Denise
Keenan, MA, at the Widex
Office of Research in
Clinical Amplification
(ORCA), Widex USA, Lisle, Ill;
and Anders Jessen, BSEE,
research engineer, and
Henning Andersen, MS,
manager of the
Development Lab, at Widex
A/S, Vaerloese, Denmark.
Correspondence can be
addressed to Francis Kuk,
PhD: e-mail: fkuk@aol.com.
Various approaches had been attempted in

frequency lowering. The first attempts were done
well before non-linear and digital technology was
applied to hearing aids. Methods such as slowplayback, time-compressed slow-playback,
frequency modification with amplitude
modulation, vocoding, zero-crossing rate division,
frequency shifting, and frequency transposition
were all major approaches that have been
summarized by Braida et al.3
More recent strategies in the area include
proportional frequency compression4 and
approaches that sharpen the spectrum of the
transposed sound5 or the various transposed

features (eg, voiceless vs voiced). Although these
approaches are significantly more complex than
earlier attempts and they all resulted in better aided thresholds, their
acceptance has been relatively limited.
What Are the Problems?
Limitations of analog signal processing. The early attempts on frequency
lowering were designed to achieve easy implementation of existing
2/15
3/19/2015
technologies rather than to achieve the desired signal processing results. Many
were not even practical enough to be implemented into hearing aids. While
lowering the frequencies, these methods also altered other aspects of speech
known to be important for perception. Some of these approaches created
unnatural sounding speech, distorted gross temporal and rhythmic patterns,
and extended durations (slow playback) of the speech signals. Others created
reversed spectrum (amplitude modulation based techniques) which is difficult
to even recognize as speech by inexperienced listeners. In vocoder-based
systems, both analysis and synthesis were often carried out using only a
limited number of frequency bands, which resulted in unnatural speech sounds.
Unnatural sounds. Despite the recent use of digital signal processing (DSP)
techniques in frequency lowering, artifacts and unnatural sounds were still
unavoidable. Some reported that the transposed sounds are unnatural,
hollow or echoic, and more difficult to understand. Another commonly
reported artifact is the perception of clicks which many listeners find
annoying. Such perception would most likely be exaggerated when the
transposed sounds and the original sounds do not overlap. Thus, despite its
potential for speech intelligibility improvement with extensive training, many
adults found it difficult to accept frequency lowering.
Insufficient training and limited evaluation. It would be highly desirable that
the new acoustic cues resulting from frequency lowering resemble the original
high frequency sounds in some meaningful, easy-to-interpret manner.
Nevertheless, these processed sounds were never heard by the hearingimpaired listeners before. As such, it is unrealistic to expect the listeners to
identify the new sounds without adequate training and experience.
Unfortunately, most previous studies have not given the test subjects time to
adjust to and learn to use these new acoustic cues. In studies where extensive
training was provided, marginal improvement in speech understanding was
observed.6
Considerations in Frequency Lowering
3/15
3/19/2015
Minimization of artifacts and unnatural sounds. Minimal artifacts or

unnaturalness will result if the frequency lowering method retains the
relationships of the original frequency components in the final signal.
Preferably, the relationships of the harmonic components stay the same, the
spectral transitions move in the same direction as the original un-transposed
signal, and the segmental-temporal characteristics stay untouched. One should
not remove or sacrifice any acoustic cues that the listeners are using before
frequency lowering. In addition, the processed speech signal should retain the
extra-linguistic (prosodic) cues, such as its pitch, tempo, and loudness.
Otherwise, it will make it more difficult for the listeners to accept the new sound
images initially and lengthen the training and relearning period.
One criterion is to lower only the frequencies that are necessary to be lowered
(instead of the full range of frequencies). For example, if someone has aidable
hearing up to 3,000 Hz, one should only process (or lower) sounds above 3,000
Hz. This has the advantage of focusing only on sounds that are relevant.
Another criterion is to apply the right amount of processing for the individual.
This is because the more aggressive the lowering (eg, higher frequency
compression ratio), the more unnatural the sound percept becomes. A
conservative or less aggressive approach will minimize the disturbance on the
original signals and avoid any potential interaction between the original signals
and the processed signals.
A final criterion is to preserve the temporal structure of the original signal in
order to retain any transition cues. This means the frequency lowering system
must have the flexibility and specificity to meet individual wearers needs.
In cases where the unnaturalness is unavoidable because of the extent of
frequency lowering, a strategy to minimize the exposure of artifacts is to make
the frequency lowering algorithm optional. That is, the wearer will only listen to
the processed sounds when he/she needs to. In situations where such a
program is not needed or not beneficial, the program may be deactivated.
4/15
3/19/2015
Proper training and evaluation. The need for training may be argued if
frequency lowering has completely altered the acoustic cues available to the
wearers. Consequently, frequency lowering technique should use a two-prong
approach. First, it should preserve the existing cues while adding new ones.
This requires special attention be paid to the individuals hearing needs and the
flexibility with the programming to accommodate such needs. Second, it
should recommend an appropriate training program with the algorithm to
further realize the potential of the transposition. In practice, this means that the
frequency lowering algorithm should receive high initial acceptance for daily
stimuli such as natures sounds. But a structured training program that is
directed towards improving sound recognition should also be available for
those who needed the training. These criteria mean that the chosen frequency
lowering algorithm must be appropriate for both speech and non-speech
sounds.
Extending Audibility via Linear Frequency Transposition
These considerations guided the development of the new, patent-pending
Audibility Extender (AE) algorithm in the recently introduced Widex Inteo
hearing aid. The AE is one form of frequency lowering technique that uses
Linear Frequency Transposition to move the unaidable high frequency sounds
to the aidable low frequency regions.
A feature of this algorithm is its inclusion in the Integrated Signal Processing
(ISP) platform6 used in the Inteo. Briefly, ISP integrates information of the
wearers, the environments, as well as the intermediate processing of each
algorithm into the Dynamic Integrator (DI). In turn, the DI coordinates all the
activities and dispatches the appropriate commands to each algorithm so that
the processed sounds would be as natural as possible with little or no artifacts.
How it works. First, the Inteo AE receives information of the wearers hearing
loss from the Dynamic Integrator (provided from Wearers Personal
Information) to decide which frequency region will be transposed. The
frequency where transposition begins is called the Start Frequency. Typically,
5/15
3/19/2015
one octave of sounds above the start frequency will be transposed. This is
called the source octave. (Figure 1a).
Meanwhile, the Speech and Noise Tracer of the HD System Analysis module
performs its spectral analysis of the environment and returns the results to the
Dynamic Integrator. The AE picks the frequency within the source octave
region with the highest intensity (eg, peak frequency), and locks it for
transposition. As the peak frequency changes, the transposed frequency also
changes. In the example, 4,000 Hz has the peak intensity (Figure 1b). Once
identified, the range of frequencies starting from 2,500 Hz will be shifted
downward to the target frequency region. In this case, 4,000 Hz (and the
sounds surrounding it) will be transposed linearly by one octave to 2,000 Hz
(Figure 1c).
The 4,000 Hz signal will be placed at 2,000 Hz and every frequency will be
shifted down by 2,000 Hz. For example, 3,000 Hz will now be at 1,000 Hz and
6/15
3/19/2015
4,500 Hz will be at 2,500 Hz (Figure 1d). In this way, the transposed signal is
likely to be placed in a region where the hearing is aidable. To limit the masking
effect from the transposed signal and any potential artifacts, frequencies that
are outside the one octave bandwidth of 2,000 Hz will be filtered out (Figure
1e).
The level of the transposed signal will be automatically set by the AE so it is

above the in-situ threshold (sensogram) of the wearer. A separate manual gain
adjustment of the transposed signal is also available. The linearly transposed
signal is mixed with the original signal below the start frequency (2,500 Hz in
this case) as the final output. (Figure 1f).
Other considerations. To ensure ease of use of the AE program, simple default
rules are implemented that consider the degree and slope of the audiogram in
deciding the default start frequency (for transposition). The optimum start
frequency is critical in ensuring acceptance and successful use of the AE.
By definition, the start frequency is the frequency where the hearing loss is
unaidable. Thus, instead of amplifying that frequency, the AE transposes it
without amplification. Consequently, too low a start frequency (below the
optimum) will result in some of the aidable frequencies not being amplified.
This removes some of the acoustic cues that are usable by the wearers to
result in distortion and unnaturalness of the signal. Too high a start frequency
will leave some of the unaidable high frequencies inaudible. In both cases, it will
unnecessarily decrease the initial acceptance of the AE and prolong the time to
7/15
3/19/2015
fully realize its potential. To meet the individual hearing needs of the wearers
and to increase the flexibility of the AE program, options to manually adjust the
start frequency from 630 Hz to 6,000 Hz at 1/3 octave intervals (as well as
individualized fitting guidelines) are available.
Another advantage of the AE is that it is an optional program. This means one
can set this program as the master default program for use in all listening
situations; alternatively, it can be used only in situations where the wearer
desires. The former may be a pediatric fitting where the child uses the AE all the
time so he or she can hear all the high frequency sounds in many environments
for speech and language purposes. The latter may be an adult who is satisfied
with the default settings of the hearing aids in most situations, but desires the
AE program for listening to birds, music, or other sounds. In this way, individual
preferences and usage habits are considered.
How is the Audibility Extender Different?
The Audibility Extender is different from other frequency lowering schemes in
several aspects:
1. It transposes only the high frequency sounds (above the start frequency)
regardless of their voicing characteristics (eg, voiced or voiceless). Thus, it is
equally effective on periodic and aperiodic sounds. Systems that are active only
for voiceless signals may miss high frequency periodic signals including music
and bird songs.
2. It is active during all segments of speech and not at specific linguistic
segments, (eg, voiced versus voiceless).
3. Typically only one octave (although two octaves may be allowed) of high
frequency sounds above the start frequency is transposed to a lower octave.
Frequencies higher and lower than the transposed region are filtered. This
limits the amount of masking and avoids the need for compression.
8/15
3/19/2015
4. For simple stimuli, it preserves the transition cues and the harmonic
relationship between the transposed signal and the original signal. This
preserves as much of the original signal as possible.
5. The transposed signal is mixed with the original signal to give a richer, more
natural sound perception. Systems that do not overlap the transposed sounds
would risk exaggerating any unnaturalness of the transposed sounds.
6. By transposing frequencies linearly, the temporal structure of the signal is
preserved. Thus, it can be easily recognized as the original source signal but at
a lower frequency.
Efficacy of the Audibility Extender: Interim Field Report
While clinical studies are being conducted to better understand the efficacy of
the AE algorithm, we have completed some preliminary studies that examined
the initial subjective preference for the AE using different stimuli.
Subjects. A total of 16 individuals with hearing impairment, primarily with high
frequency sensorineural hearing loss, were tested to examine their preference
for the AE for bird songs, music, and discourse speech stimuli. Of these
subjects, 5 individuals had a precipitously sloping hearing loss with normal
hearing below 1000 Hz, and 11 had a sloping high frequency hearing loss of
moderate to severe degree.
Hearing devices. All the subjects with a precipitous hearing loss and 6 subjects
with a sloping high frequency hearing loss wore the open-fit Inteo lan during
the study. The rest of the subjects wore the Inteo IN-9 and IN-X (ITC) with the
appropriate vent diameter (1-3 mm diameter). The fitting of the Inteo hearing
aids including the AE algorithm, followed the default recommendations (eg, no
individual fine-tuning).
Stimuli and testing. Three sets of stimuli were used to evaluate the subjective
preference for the AE. A set of 12 bird songs (different species, with mostly
9/15
3/19/2015
high frequency content up to 6,000 Hz), 12 musical passages (including single

instruments, ensemble, and songs with lyrics), and 12 short discourse
passages read by a female announcer were used. Each stimulus was about 510 s in duration. Subjects listened to each stimulus in the AE-On and AE-Off
conditions (the same frequency response and feature settings were used
between AE-On and Off) and the subjects indicated the setting (eg, AE-On or
AE-Off) they preferred for the particular stimulus.
The stimuli were presented in random order and at a comfortable listening level
chosen by the subject in the AE-Off condition. The number of stimuli within a
stimulus set that the subject preferred with the AE-On was recorded and
expressed as a percentage displayed in the following figures.
Preference for bird songs. Figure 2 shows the individual preference for AE
using bird songs as stimuli. Each bar represents the percentage of time the AE
was preferred by a specific subject. For example, a preference of 100% (Subject
#18) indicated that the subject preferred the AE-On for all 12 bird songs,
whereas a preference of 50% (subject #15) indicated that the subject preferred
the AE-On for 6 of the 12 bird songs (the other 6 for the AE-Off). One can see
that subject preferences varied dramatically. Subject 9 preferred the AE-On for
only one bird song, whereas subject 18 preferred the AE-On for all the bird
songs. On average, AE-On was preferred for over 60% of the bird songs.
10/15
3/19/2015
Figure 3 shows the individual preferences for AE using music as stimuli. Similar
to using bird songs as stimuli, one sees a range of preferences for the AE from
less than 10% to over 90% of the time. As a group, the preference for AE-On
was about 50% of the stimuli. These preferences are slightly lower than when
bird songs were used as stimuli.
Preference for speech. Figure 4 shows the individual preference when
conversational speech passages were used as stimuli. There was an even
wider range of preference for the AE, with Subject #7 showing no preference for
AE-On (eg, all AE-Off) and Subject #2 preferring only the AE-On condition. As a
group, AE-On was preferred for 33% of the stimuli.
Conclusions
There are several observations when one examines the preference data across
subjects and stimuli. First, subjects with a sloping high frequency hearing loss
subjectively prefer the AE when listening to birds, music, and speech. Second,
the preference for the AE-On varied with the complexity of the stimuli. Bird
songs are simpler in spectral content than music and speech, and the
preference for the AE was the highest for birds (over 60%), less for music (55%),
and least for running speech (33%). This suggests that the simpler the stimuli,
the higher the preference for the AE.
Every subject preferred the AE-On for at least one stimulus. However, subject
preference for AE in one stimulus category does not predict preference in
another stimulus category. For example, Subject #18 preferred the AE-On 100%
of the time when listening to bird songs, but less than 10% of the time when it
11/15
3/19/2015
comes to music and speech stimuli. Whereas Subject #2 preferred AE-On 100%
of the time when listening to running speech, he only preferred it 33% of the
time when listening to bird songs.
It needs to be emphasized that the above performance was noted when the
subjects were initially fitted with the default settings without additional finetuning to the wearers hearing needs. Furthermore, no experience with the
transposed sounds was provided prior to the study. With additional experience
and fine-tuning, one would have considered the individual hearing needs in
setting the optimal transposition parameters. This could further improve the
preference for the AE. This is being evaluated and will be reported later.
With appropriate training and fine-tuning, Linear Frequency Transposition may
improve the recognition of high frequency words for those who are limited by
their high frequency hearing loss. This could be especially beneficial for
children during critical speech and language development periods. Another
potential application is in open-fittings where this algorithm increases the
audibility of high frequency sounds while open-fit provides excellent listening
comfort.
References
1. Kuk F, Ludvigsen C. Amplcusion Management 101: Understanding variables.
The Hearing Review. 2002;9(8):22-32.
2. Moore B. Dead regions in the cochlea: conceptual foundations, diagnosis,
and clinical applications. Ear Hear. 2004;25(2):98-116.
3. Braida L, Durlach I, Lippman P, Hicks B, Rabinowitz W, Reed C. Hearing Aids
A Review of Past Research of Linear Amplification, Amplitude Compression
and Frequency Lowering. In: ASHA Monographs; No 19. Rockville, MD:
ASHA;1978.
4. Turner C, Hurtig R. Proportional frequency compression of speech for
12/15
3/19/2015
listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999;106(2): 877886.
5. Aguilera-Muoz C, Peggy B, Rutledge C, Gago A. Frequency lowering
processing for listeners with significant hearing loss. In: Proceedings of the
Sixth IEEE International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and Systems (Cat.
No.99EX357), Part 2(2); 1999:741-744.
6. Kromen M, Troelsen T, Pawlowski A, Fomsgaard L, Suurballe M, Henningsen
L. InteoA Prime Example of Integrated Signal Processing. In: Integrated Signal
ProcessingA New Standard in Enhancing Hearing Aid Performance. Long
Island City, NY: Widex Hearing Aid Co; 2006.
Related Articles
Webinar Being Normal by Curtis Alcock Now Available
ADA and IHS to Combine 2016 Fall Conventions; Unison Summit

Announced
2015 AAA Convention Alphabetical Exhibitors List
Ears May Have Special Pain Pathway, Study Finds
Hearing Health Providers Enter Digital Age with Gadget-friendly Lab

Coat
13/15
3/19/2015
Research Provides New Insights Into Mnires Disease
Data Watch
National Trends Hearing Care KPI Ticker
Unique Patients Seen
8 10% 70
78
74
By Location
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
PoweredBy:
ADDITIONAL SITES IN THE ALLIED 360 NETWORK

AXISImagingNews
247
ClinicalLabProducts
OrthodonticProducts
PlasticSurgeryPractice
PhysicalTherapyProducts
RehabManagement
RT:ForDecisionMakersinRespiratoryCare
SleepReview
14/15
3/19/2015
HELPFUL LINKS
ContactUs
Advertise
Subscriptions
SiteFeedback
The Hearing Review

Allied 360
Contact Us
Work With Us
Advertise
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
15/15

Linear Frequency Transposition - Extending The Audibility OfHigh-Frequency Information - Hearing Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Linear Frequency Transposition - Extending The Audibility OfHigh-Frequency Information - Hearing Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3/19/2015

What are you looking for?

Linear Frequency Transposition:

Published on October 8, 2006

What is Frequency Lowering?

Various approaches had been attempted in

transposed sound5 or the various transposed

Minimization of artifacts and unnatural sounds. Minimal artifacts or

The level of the transposed signal will be automatically set by the AE so it is

high frequency content up to 6,000 Hz), 12 musical passages (including single

ADA and IHS to Combine 2016 Fall Conventions; Unison Summit

Ears May Have Special Pain Pathway, Study Finds

Hearing Health Providers Enter Digital Age with Gadget-friendly Lab

Research Provides New Insights Into Mnires Disease

ADDITIONAL SITES IN THE ALLIED 360 NETWORK

The Hearing Review

You might also like