Sliding-band dynamic range compression for use in hearing aids

  • Nitya Tiwari
  • Prem C. PandeyEmail author


Sensorineural hearing loss is associated with elevated hearing thresholds, reduced dynamic range, and loudness recruitment. Signal processing with dynamic range compression is used in hearing aids for presenting all the sounds comfortably within the limited dynamic range of the listener. A dynamic range compression technique, named as ‘sliding-band compression’, is proposed to overcome the shortcomings of the commonly used single-band and multiband compression techniques. The gain at each frequency index is calculated as a function of the short-time power in an auditory critical band centered at it. The technique avoids the attenuation of high-frequency components due to the presence of strong low-frequency components, which may occur in single-band compression. Further, it avoids distortions in the shape of spectral resonances and discontinuities during the resonance transitions, which may occur in multiband compression. The proposed technique was implemented for offline processing and compared with single-band compression and multiband compression using objective measures and different test inputs. For two-tone inputs, the single-band compression showed attenuation of the high-frequency tone with an increase in the level of the low-frequency tone. For swept-frequency single-tone input, the multiband compression showed errors in the tone amplitude of 1.5–2.5 dB for compression ratio of 2–10. Sliding-band compression did not show either type of error. The technique has been also implemented using a fixed-point processor for real-time processing with audio latency acceptable for face-to-face communication.


Dynamic range compression Hearing aid Sensorineural hearing loss Sliding-band compression 



The funding was provided by Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology, Government of India (Grant No. DeitY/R&DffDC/13(3)/2013)


  1. ANSI. (2003). Specification of hearing aid characteristics. American National Standards Institute Standard S3.22-2003. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  2. Arehart, K. H., Kates, J. M., & Anderson, M. C. (2010). Effects of noise, nonlinear processing, and linear filtering on perceived speech quality. Ear and Hearing, 31(3), 420–436. Scholar
  3. Asano F., Suzuki Y., Sone T., Kakehata S., Satake M., Ohyama K., Kobayashi T., & Takasaka T. (1991). A digital hearing aid that compensates for sensorineural impaired listeners. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP 1991), Toronto, Ontario, Canada (pp. 3625–3628).
  4. Boike, K. T., & Souza, P. E. (2000). Effect of compression ratio on speech recognition and speech-quality ratings with wide dynamic range compression amplification. Journal of Speech Language, and Hearing Research, 43(2), 456–468. Scholar
  5. Clark, N. (2012). Bio aid v1.0.2. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  6. Cox, R. M., Alexander, G. C., Gilmore, C., & Pusakulich, K. M. (1988). Use of the connected speech test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. Ear and Hearing, 9(4), 198–207. Scholar
  7. Dillon, H. (1996). Compression? Yes, but for low or high frequencies, for low or high intensities, and with what response times?. Ear and Hearing, 17(4), 287–307. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from,_But_for_Low_or_High.1.aspx.
  8. Dillon, H. (2012). Hearing aids (2nd ed.). Sydney: Boomerang.Google Scholar
  9. Dreschler, W. A. (1988). Dynamic range reduction by peak clipping or compression and its effects on phoneme perception in hearing-impaired listeners. Scandinavian Audiology, 17(1), 45–51. Scholar
  10. Dreschler, W. A., Eberhardt, D., & Melk, P. W. (1984). The use of single-channel compression for the improvement of speech intelligibility. Scandinavian Audiology, 13(4), 231–236. Scholar
  11. Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., & Elberling, C. (2006). Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings—1. Patterns of benefit. International Journal of Audiology, 45(3), 130–152. Scholar
  12. Griffin, D. W., & Lim, J. S. (1984). Signal estimation from modified short-time Fourier transform. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 32(2), 236–243. Scholar
  13. IT4You. (2019). Petralex hearing aid v3.3.1. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  14. ITU. (1998). Relative timing of sound and vision for broadcasting. International Telecommunication Union Rec. ITU-R BT.1359. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from!!PDF-E.pdf.
  15. ITU. (2001). Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ): An objective method for end-to-end speech quality assessment of narrow-band telephone networks and speech codecs. International Telecommunications Union Rec. ITU-T P.862. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  16. Jayan, A. R., & Pandey, P. C. (2015). Automated modification of consonant–vowel ratio of stops for improving speech intelligibility. International Journal of Speech Technology, 18(1), 113–130. Scholar
  17. Kates J. M. (2003). Dynamic-range compression using digital frequency warping. In Proceedings of the 37th Asilomar on Signals, Systems and Computers, 2003 (ACSSC 2003), Pacific Grove (pp. 715–719).
  18. Kates, J. M. (2005). Principles of digital dynamic-range compression. Trends in Amplification, 9(2), 45–76. Scholar
  19. Kates, J. M. (2010). Understanding compression: Modeling the effects of dynamic-range compression in hearing aids. International Journal of Audiology, 49(6), 395–409. Scholar
  20. Kates, J. M., & Arehart, K. H. (2005). Multichannel dynamic-range compression using digital frequency warping. EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing, 18, 3003–3014. Scholar
  21. King, A. B., & Martin, M. C. (1984). Is AGC beneficial in hearing aids? British Journal of Audiology, 18(1), 31–38. Scholar
  22. Lamberg Solutions. (2014). Hearing aid with replay (lite) v2.0.0. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from htps://
  23. Laurence, R. F., Moore, B. C. J., & Glasberg, B. R. (1983). A comparison of behind-the-ear high-fidelity linear hearing aids and two-channel compression aids, in the laboratory and in everyday life. British Journal of Audiology, 17(1), 31–48. Scholar
  24. Levitt, H., Pickett, J. M., & Houde, R. A. (Eds.). (1980). Senosry aids for the hearing impaired (pp. 1–16). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. Lindemann, E. (1997). The continuous frequency dynamic range compressor. In Proceedings of 1997 Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics (WASPAA 1997), New Paltz, New York (pp. 1–4).
  26. Lippmann, R. P., Braida, L. D., & Durlach, N. I. (1981). Study of multichannel amplitude compression and linear amplification for persons with sensorineural hearing loss. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69(2), 524–534. Scholar
  27. Newbrick S. A. (2019). uSound (Hearing assistant) v.3.0.14r. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  28. Moore B. C. J. (1998). Psychoacoustics of cochlear hearing impairment and the design of hearing aids. In Proceedings of 16th Internantional Congress on Acoustics (ICA 1998), Seattle, Washington (pp. 2105–2108). Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  29. Rutledge, J. C., Nelson, P. B., Tejero-Calado, J. C., Chang, J. K., & Williams, R. R. (2010). Performance of sinusoidal model based amplitude compression in fluctuating noise. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP 2010). Texas, Dallas (pp. 189–192).
  30. Sandlin, R. E. (Ed.). (2000). Textbook of hearing aid amplification (2nd ed., pp. 210–246). San Diego: Singular.Google Scholar
  31. Sharma, S., Tiwari, N., & Pandey, P. C. (2018). Implementation of digital hearing aid as a smartphone application. In Proceeding of INTERSPEECH 2018, Hyderabad, India (pp. 1175–1179). Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  32. Shi, L. F., & Doherthy, K. A. (2008). Subjective and objective effects of fast and slow compression on the perception of reverberant speech in listeners with hearing loss. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51(5), 1328–1340. Scholar
  33. Silverman F. H. (1995). Speech, language, and hearing disorders (pp. 14–38). Needham: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  34. Souza, P. E. (2002). Effects of compression on speech acoustics, intelligibility, and sound quality. Trends in Amplification, 6(4), 131–165. Scholar
  35. Souza, P. E., Jenstad, L., & Folino, R. (2005). Using multichannel wide-dynamic range compression in severely hearing-impaired listeners: Effects on speech recognition and quality. Ear and Hearing, 26(2), 120–131. Scholar
  36. Spectrum Digital, Inc. (2010). TMS320C5515 eZdsp USB stick. Technical reference manual. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  37. Stone, M. A., Moore, B. C. J., Alcántara, J. I., & Glasberg, B. R. (1999). Comparison of different forms of compression using wearable digital hearing aids. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106(6), 3603–3619. Scholar
  38. Tejero-Calado, J. C., Rutledge, J. C., & Nelson, P. B. (2001). Preserving spectral contrast in amplitude compression for hearing aids. In Proceedings of 23th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology (EMBS 2001). Istanbul, Turkey (pp. 1453–1456).
  39. Texas Instruments, Inc. (2008). TLV320AIC3204 Ultra low power stereo audio codec. Product data sheet. Accessed 26 Feb 2019.
  40. Texas Instruments, Inc. (2013). TMS320C5515 Fixed-point digital signal processor. Product data sheet. Retrieved February 26, 2019 from
  41. Tiwari, N., & Pandey, P. C. (2014). A sliding-band dynamic range compression for use in hearing aids. In Proceeding of National Conference on Communications 2014 (NCC 2014). Kanpur, India (paper no. 1569847357).
  42. Vickers, E. C. (2014). Frequency domain multiband dynamics compressor with automatically adjusting frequency band boundary locations. U.S. Patent 8 903 109 B2.Google Scholar
  43. Villchur, E. (1973). Signal processing to improve speech intelligibility in perceptive deafness. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 53(6), 1646–1657. Scholar
  44. Zwicker, E. (1961). Subdivision of the audible frequency range into critical bands (Freqenzgruppen). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 33(2), 248. Scholar
  45. Zwicker, E., & Terhardt, E. (1980). Analytical expressions for critical-band rate and critical bandwidth as a function of frequency. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 68(5), 1523–1525. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology BombayPowai MumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations