As an aging "audiophile", I am faced with the probability that I will need
hearing aids (both ears) in the near future. Through a bit of research on
the net it appears music is not a priority with hearing aid design. I
understand that digital hearing aids are probably the most versatile as far
as programing options but there still seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction
even with units designed specifically with music in mind. I would
appreciate comments by other hearing aid users about their experiences.

Thanks
John

It has been confirmed to me (by people who design chips for hearing aids)
that distortion isn't even a design criterion.
Do you get satisfactory results using normal headphones?

"John Richards" wrote in message
...
As an aging "audiophile", I am faced with the probability that I will need
hearing aids (both ears) in the near future. Through a bit of research on
the net it appears music is not a priority with hearing aid design. I
understand that digital hearing aids are probably the most versatile as
far
as programing options but there still seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction
even with units designed specifically with music in mind. I would
appreciate comments by other hearing aid users about their experiences.

Thanks
John

"Bruno Putzeys" wrote in message
...
It has been confirmed to me (by people who design chips for hearing aids)
that distortion isn't even a design criterion.
Do you get satisfactory results using normal headphones?

Surprizingly the sound from cheap "bud" type headphones supplied with small
portable radios and cd players sound as good or better in some respects than
a pair of Sennheiser HD580 headphones (without a dedicated headphone amp).
The Sennheisers sound slow and bassheavy. I believe that might be due to the
lack of bass response with the cheap phones which in turn accentuates the
mid and high frequencies thereby effectively acting like an equalizer. This
equalized response probably compliments my hearing (loss of sensitivity to
higher frequencies) which when combined gives me a somewhat balanced
response.

I hadn't even thought of distortion per se, I was more concerned with
frequency balance and dynamics.

John

John,

I share the same problem. My old ears drop off beginning around 3,000hz to the
point that by 10,000 hz my hearing is down 12 db. The drop off is a smooth
curve
for both ears. So, I reasoned that I could get a good equalizer, but I could
"hear" the extra circuitry of the equalizer, plus boosting mids and highs puts
a
strain on speaker drivers and amplifiers. This approach increases distortion in

a home sound system.

So, I began to "voice" my own 3-way speaker system by using a midrange driver
that was at least 3db more sensitive than the woofer and got a tweeter that was

more sensitive (2db) than the midrange. Then, by twiddling the crossover
network
I was able to get a smoother transition from one driver to the next than might
be thought.

Now, I have speakers and electronics that play with little distortion but have
a
response curve that is somewhat of a mirror image to the hearing acuity of my
ears -- and hearing aids are not required to enjoy them. Others find my music
system to sound very "clear" and to accentuate mid and high frequencies, even
to
the point some folks don't like my sound. But, hey, it's my sound on my
speakers
in my music room, and it sounds quite natural to me. By playing with driver
efficiencies rather than equalization I was able to maintain a low distortion
output. Also, I am not a loudness freak and am careful not to play stuff with a

lot of high frequency content too loudly. No need to cause further damage to my

old ears.

Also, for me, cutting out alcohol and caffeine helped to restore a little
better
high frequency acuity. And, the brain can "remember" what some things used to
sound like and helps to maintain the aural illusion of things such as the
"shimmer" off a cymbal, etc., even though the ears may not be sending the
signal
to our brains. But, that gets into psychoacoustics, which can be a personal
thing.

Hope this is pertinent info.

Dick

John Richards wrote:

As an aging "audiophile", I am faced with the probability that I will need
hearing aids (both ears) in the near future. Through a bit of research on
the net it appears music is not a priority with hearing aid design. I
understand that digital hearing aids are probably the most versatile as far
as programing options but there still seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction
even with units designed specifically with music in mind. I would
appreciate comments by other hearing aid users about their experiences.

Thanks
John

I wonder if it will continue to sound natural to you as your brain
adapts to the filtered and uncompensated input it gets from the real
world. Of course, if you do not ever go to a live concert again, it
might continue to work.

Kal

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:30:27 GMT, wrote:

John,

I share the same problem. My old ears drop off beginning around 3,000hz to the
point that by 10,000 hz my hearing is down 12 db. The drop off is a smooth
curve
for both ears. So, I reasoned that I could get a good equalizer, but I could
"hear" the extra circuitry of the equalizer, plus boosting mids and highs puts
a
strain on speaker drivers and amplifiers. This approach increases distortion in

a home sound system.

So, I began to "voice" my own 3-way speaker system by using a midrange driver
that was at least 3db more sensitive than the woofer and got a tweeter that was

more sensitive (2db) than the midrange. Then, by twiddling the crossover
network
I was able to get a smoother transition from one driver to the next than might
be thought.

Now, I have speakers and electronics that play with little distortion but have
a
response curve that is somewhat of a mirror image to the hearing acuity of my
ears -- and hearing aids are not required to enjoy them. Others find my music
system to sound very "clear" and to accentuate mid and high frequencies, even
to
the point some folks don't like my sound. But, hey, it's my sound on my
speakers
in my music room, and it sounds quite natural to me. By playing with driver
efficiencies rather than equalization I was able to maintain a low distortion
output. Also, I am not a loudness freak and am careful not to play stuff with a

lot of high frequency content too loudly. No need to cause further damage to my

old ears.

Also, for me, cutting out alcohol and caffeine helped to restore a little
better
high frequency acuity. And, the brain can "remember" what some things used to
sound like and helps to maintain the aural illusion of things such as the
"shimmer" off a cymbal, etc., even though the ears may not be sending the
signal
to our brains. But, that gets into psychoacoustics, which can be a personal
thing.

Hope this is pertinent info.

Dick

John Richards wrote:

As an aging "audiophile", I am faced with the probability that I will need
hearing aids (both ears) in the near future. Through a bit of research on
the net it appears music is not a priority with hearing aid design. I
understand that digital hearing aids are probably the most versatile as far
as programing options but there still seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction
even with units designed specifically with music in mind. I would
appreciate comments by other hearing aid users about their experiences.

Thanks
John

Kal,

Every time I mention this I get opinions to the contrary of what I do. The point is
that when I go out into the "real world" I wear a hearing aid that boosts the high
frequencies. When at home, in my own "private world," I no longer wear the hearing
aid and enjoy music with a slightly contoured playback voicing -- about the same as
if I were to turn the treble control up quite a bit. Part of the problem is that I
no longer have a line control center with tone controls. The selection of drivers
with different sensitivities makes for an easier load on the amp than boosting
certain frequencies or using an equalizer.

What do you think of this?

Dick

Kalman Rubinson wrote:

I wonder if it will continue to sound natural to you as your brain
adapts to the filtered and uncompensated input it gets from the real
world. Of course, if you do not ever go to a live concert again, it
might continue to work.

Kal

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:30:27 GMT, wrote:

John,

I share the same problem. My old ears drop off beginning around 3,000hz to the
point that by 10,000 hz my hearing is down 12 db. The drop off is a smooth
curve
for both ears. So, I reasoned that I could get a good equalizer, but I could
"hear" the extra circuitry of the equalizer, plus boosting mids and highs puts
a
strain on speaker drivers and amplifiers. This approach increases distortion in

a home sound system.

So, I began to "voice" my own 3-way speaker system by using a midrange driver
that was at least 3db more sensitive than the woofer and got a tweeter that was

more sensitive (2db) than the midrange. Then, by twiddling the crossover
network
I was able to get a smoother transition from one driver to the next than might
be thought.

Now, I have speakers and electronics that play with little distortion but have
a
response curve that is somewhat of a mirror image to the hearing acuity of my
ears -- and hearing aids are not required to enjoy them. Others find my music
system to sound very "clear" and to accentuate mid and high frequencies, even
to
the point some folks don't like my sound. But, hey, it's my sound on my
speakers
in my music room, and it sounds quite natural to me. By playing with driver
efficiencies rather than equalization I was able to maintain a low distortion
output. Also, I am not a loudness freak and am careful not to play stuff with a

lot of high frequency content too loudly. No need to cause further damage to my

old ears.

Also, for me, cutting out alcohol and caffeine helped to restore a little
better
high frequency acuity. And, the brain can "remember" what some things used to
sound like and helps to maintain the aural illusion of things such as the
"shimmer" off a cymbal, etc., even though the ears may not be sending the
signal
to our brains. But, that gets into psychoacoustics, which can be a personal
thing.

Hope this is pertinent info.

Dick

John Richards wrote:

As an aging "audiophile", I am faced with the probability that I will need
hearing aids (both ears) in the near future. Through a bit of research on
the net it appears music is not a priority with hearing aid design. I
understand that digital hearing aids are probably the most versatile as far
as programing options but there still seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction
even with units designed specifically with music in mind. I would
appreciate comments by other hearing aid users about their experiences.

Thanks
John

On 24 Nov 2003 00:43:18 GMT, wrote:

Kal,

Every time I mention this I get opinions to the contrary of what I do. The point is
that when I go out into the "real world" I wear a hearing aid that boosts the high
frequencies. When at home, in my own "private world," I no longer wear the hearing
aid and enjoy music with a slightly contoured playback voicing -- about the same as
if I were to turn the treble control up quite a bit. Part of the problem is that I
no longer have a line control center with tone controls. The selection of drivers
with different sensitivities makes for an easier load on the amp than boosting
certain frequencies or using an equalizer.

What do you think of this?

Since you are using compensation all the time. you probably will not
experience the same adaptation that we found in a few experiments with
such a system. OTOH, I would suggest a good eq such as the Z-systems
rdp-1 or 2 which can easily be adapted to different listening
conditions (day time vs. late night, for example) or to changing needs
(possible further deterioration).

Kal

Kalman Rubinson wrote:

On 24 Nov 2003 00:43:18 GMT, wrote:

Kal,

Every time I mention this I get opinions to the contrary of what I do. The point is
that when I go out into the "real world" I wear a hearing aid that boosts the high
frequencies. When at home, in my own "private world," I no longer wear the hearing
aid and enjoy music with a slightly contoured playback voicing -- about the same as
if I were to turn the treble control up quite a bit. Part of the problem is that I
no longer have a line control center with tone controls. The selection of drivers
with different sensitivities makes for an easier load on the amp than boosting
certain frequencies or using an equalizer.

What do you think of this?

Since you are using compensation all the time. you probably will not
experience the same adaptation that we found in a few experiments with
such a system. OTOH, I would suggest a good eq such as the Z-systems
rdp-1 or 2 which can easily be adapted to different listening
conditions (day time vs. late night, for example) or to changing needs
(possible further deterioration).

Kal

Kal,

I am aware of some of the research that implies the brain can remember what things
sounded like before hearing deficits set in. I was an avid musician for many years when
I was younger, played in different bands and orchestras, and compulsively attended every
live event possible. I think I have a good recollection of how live music is supposed to
sound. Now, as to adapting to changing conditions, I did so for years until friends and
associates, and the boss at work, stongly implied I should get a hearing aid. They were
getting tired of me saying "Huh."

I still contend that an equalizer places extra strain on an amp which is why I go for
the mid and tweeter drivers with the greatest sensivity, commensurate with good
reproduction. Contrary to most guys, I usually hear too much bass (because I am not
hearing the rest of the music). But, the power curve of most music splits at around
350hz so I suppose some equalization of the highs with a good equalizer could be OK with
my super efficient drivers. But, who has such an equalizer that is transparent and who
will loan one to me for in-house trials? I am a minimalist and strive for the simplest
system and shortest interconnects and cables possible. Mucking up a good system with an
additional component is not desireable, unless it is guaranteed to provide satisfaction.

As the "boomers" age this big chunk of our demographics will be looking for home systems
that have that extra bit of clarity or zing in the upper range. Maybe there is a market
niche burgeoning for the audio industry?

Whatta' hobby!!!!!!!

I've discussed these issues with a friend suffering from severe and
uneven presbycusis. He does remember how some things are
supposed to sound but, when we set up an EQ to his taste, he used it
only briefly, preferring to simply play everything louder. This
suggests to me that he is undergoing adaptation. (He does not wear an
aid although he is thinking it is inevitable.)

I do not think that using drivers of varying sensitivity is a good
approach since the range of variation of generally available drivers
is probably no more than 20dB and their bandwidths may not let you
configure them to correspond to the compensation parameters you
require.

I do not know the structure of your system but I've found the
Z-systems EQs transparent, flexible and useful. Digital in and
digital out, 24/96, 6 bands, variable Q, adjustment range -95 to
+12dB. http://www.z-sys.com/cp_rdp1s.html

Kal

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 02:14:55 GMT, wrote:

Kalman Rubinson wrote:

On 24 Nov 2003 00:43:18 GMT, wrote:

Kal,

Every time I mention this I get opinions to the contrary of what I do. The point is
that when I go out into the "real world" I wear a hearing aid that boosts the high
frequencies. When at home, in my own "private world," I no longer wear the hearing
aid and enjoy music with a slightly contoured playback voicing -- about the same as
if I were to turn the treble control up quite a bit. Part of the problem is that I
no longer have a line control center with tone controls. The selection of drivers
with different sensitivities makes for an easier load on the amp than boosting
certain frequencies or using an equalizer.

What do you think of this?

Since you are using compensation all the time. you probably will not
experience the same adaptation that we found in a few experiments with
such a system. OTOH, I would suggest a good eq such as the Z-systems
rdp-1 or 2 which can easily be adapted to different listening
conditions (day time vs. late night, for example) or to changing needs
(possible further deterioration).

Kal

Kal,

I am aware of some of the research that implies the brain can remember what things
sounded like before hearing deficits set in. I was an avid musician for many years when
I was younger, played in different bands and orchestras, and compulsively attended every
live event possible. I think I have a good recollection of how live music is supposed to
sound. Now, as to adapting to changing conditions, I did so for years until friends and
associates, and the boss at work, stongly implied I should get a hearing aid. They were
getting tired of me saying "Huh."

I still contend that an equalizer places extra strain on an amp which is why I go for
the mid and tweeter drivers with the greatest sensivity, commensurate with good
reproduction. Contrary to most guys, I usually hear too much bass (because I am not
hearing the rest of the music). But, the power curve of most music splits at around
350hz so I suppose some equalization of the highs with a good equalizer could be OK with
my super efficient drivers. But, who has such an equalizer that is transparent and who
will loan one to me for in-house trials? I am a minimalist and strive for the simplest
system and shortest interconnects and cables possible. Mucking up a good system with an
additional component is not desireable, unless it is guaranteed to provide satisfaction.

As the "boomers" age this big chunk of our demographics will be looking for home systems
that have that extra bit of clarity or zing in the upper range. Maybe there is a market
niche burgeoning for the audio industry?

Whatta' hobby!!!!!!!

Kalman Rubinson wrote:

I've discussed these issues with a friend suffering from severe and
uneven presbycusis. He does remember how some things are
supposed to sound but, when we set up an EQ to his taste, he used it
only briefly, preferring to simply play everything louder. This
suggests to me that he is undergoing adaptation. (He does not wear an
aid although he is thinking it is inevitable.)

...snip remainder.....

Mead killion of Etymotic Research once decribed this phenomenon. He said that
most hearing loss is best described as a threshold phenomenon.

For example, there are 70 year old musicians with significant hearing loss who
are making valuable musical contributions because when the sound is loud enough
their hearing is close to normal.

On 24 Nov 2003 19:59:01 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:

Mead killion of Etymotic Research once decribed this phenomenon. He said that
most hearing loss is best described as a threshold phenomenon.

For example, there are 70 year old musicians with significant hearing loss who
are making valuable musical contributions because when the sound is loud enough
their hearing is close to normal.

We have measured this, too, but do not have the statistical ammunition
to comment on whether it is the prevalent mechanism.

Kal

When the sounds are loud enough, hearing is close to normal.

That's my situation. Equalization doesn't help. A well-designed hearing aid
should have a loudness discriminating equalizer in it (sort of like the
Dolby system, only contoured for the patient's hearing loss). My problem is
a 50dB loss at 4kHz, or more accurately, tinnitus masking sounds in that
frequency range until they get 50dB louder than a person with "normal"
hearing would detect. Turning up a graphic equalizer at 4kHz just makes
things sound overly bright to me. More volume works better, as long as it
isn't so loud so as to further damage my hearing.

"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
Kalman Rubinson wrote:

I've discussed these issues with a friend suffering from severe and
uneven presbycusis. He does remember how some things are
supposed to sound but, when we set up an EQ to his taste, he used it
only briefly, preferring to simply play everything louder. This
suggests to me that he is undergoing adaptation. (He does not wear an
aid although he is thinking it is inevitable.)

..snip remainder.....

Mead killion of Etymotic Research once decribed this phenomenon. He said
that
most hearing loss is best described as a threshold phenomenon.

For example, there are 70 year old musicians with significant hearing loss
who
are making valuable musical contributions because when the sound is loud
enough
their hearing is close to normal.

Nousaine wrote:
Mead killion of Etymotic Research once decribed this phenomenon. He
said that most hearing loss is best described as a threshold
phenomenon.

Mr. Killion also designed the k-amp hearing aid:
http://www.etymotic.com/ha/kamp.asp .

the algorithm has also been implemented digitally as the digi-k:
http://www.etymotic.com/ha/digik.asp .

implementations of both are available from various hearing aid
manufacturers.

--
Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." |
"someday the industry will have throbbing frontal lobes and will be able
to write provably correct software. also, I want a pony." -- Zach Brown