Hi Peter,
Yes, I suppose I am using my computer as a hearing aid! Having said that, I=
do already wear a digital hearing aid in my left ear; I should wear anothe=
r I have in my right, but because my hearing loss in this ear is so advance=
d, I gain very little in doing so. Having said that, I do wear it when list=
ening to music over the hi-fi. It is therefore clear that my listening set-=
up would certainly be too HF dominant for a person with 'normal' hearing. H=
owever, in doing any critical editing, I would use headphones, with amp at =
'default' setting, and the only adjustment would be to channel volume to cr=
eate balance.
I was interested to read what you said about audiologists, inasmuch as they=
don't test above 8K. I don't know what country you're in, but I'm in the U=
K, and when next I go to see my audiologist, I'll make enquiries about this=
. I can recall seeing graphs on their screen for both ears, but stupidly it=
never occurred to me look closer and note frequencies! For any non hearing=
aid wearers reading, it might be well to note that modern digital hearing =
aids normally have several 'programs'. These are settings to use in differe=
nt ambient surroundings. There is a setting for use in 'noisy' situations, =
such as a supermarket, or dinner party. It was an unbelievable joy to me, w=
hen I first used this setting, on my first digital hearing aid at a dinner =
party some years ago now. The difference to analogue was truly amazing! I w=
as able to hear everybody, individually at the table, which I hadn't been a=
ble to do for years. Previously it had been just a 'mush' of indecipherable=
noise. Also the setting up of hearing aids is now completely different. Yo=
u sit at an angle of forty five degrees to a loud speaker, which transmits =
an undulating, variable tone, from lowest to highest. The ear that is direc=
ted at the speaker, is wearing the normal hearing aid, which is connected t=
emporarily via a special port, to the computer that's generating the sound.=
Somehow, presumably via feedback, but it's magic to me, the computer progr=
am is able to detect which frequencies you can hear, and which frequencies =
you can't. The hearing aid is then programmed to amplify these specific fre=
quencies. A graph is also generated of your hearing range for that ear. The=
re are other 'niceties' which can be/are applied. The most useful is, that =
if like me you wear (or should do!) two hearing aids, they 'talk' to each o=
ther. By this I mean that you only have to change 'channels' on one, but bo=
th are changed in doing so. Also, a delay can be programmed in, so that on =
turning on, or closing the battery door, the aid/s don't operate for a set =
period of seconds; the purpose of this is to avoid feedback noise, which dr=
aws attention to the wearer. I have five 'programs' on mine, which is more =
than I need; there's quiet room, noisy room, TV etc. I only ever use the fi=
rst two! Hope this hasn't been boring.
Cheers
Max
--- In Peter Shute <> wrote:
>
> So you're using your computer as a hearing aid to restore sounds you can'=
t normally hear? My hearing drops off from 6kHz, but for some reason I've n=
ever thought of doing it with any of my recordings either.
>
> I did once try it with some generated tones to see how high I could go if=
I boosted it, and was surprised I could hear quite high frequencies. (Mayb=
e 15kHz?) But then I wondered how safe it was to be listening to boosted so=
unds. Although I perceived them as close to inaudible, I wondered if the le=
vels might have been high enough to damage my hearing further, so I stopped=
doing it. I've toyed with the idea of asking an audiologist for advice on =
what's safe, but they don't seem to bother testing above 8kHz if the graphs=
they give you are anything to go by.
>
> I would have thought that unless the equalisation you're using makes your=
hearing equivalent to "normal" then it wouldn't be useful for determining =
whether a recording would sound good to someone with normal hearing. I.e yo=
u might have boosted the HF to unnaturally high levels without realising.
>
> Peter Shute
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 17/08/2013, at 10:22 PM, "Max" <<maxcatterwell=
@...>> wrote:
>
>
>
> While editing a rain recording I'd made yesterday, I suddenly wondered, h=
ow do other, critically eared people, listen to their recordings while edit=
ing? What I mean is, do you listen to them with the default amp setting, or=
with either bass/treble or equalizer adjustment?
> In my particular case, when listening to either edited or commercial soun=
d, I adjust via graphic equalizer (computer) or bass/treble (hi-fi), to com=
pensate mainly for high frequency hearing loss. What I find odd is, that it=
was only yesterday for the first time, that I did this while editing! I ha=
ve an Asus Xonar Essence STX card in my computer, which is a reference qual=
ity headphone amp primarily, but I use it with my monitors also. With this,=
I normally leave the equalizer setting on 'Default' while editing. But yes=
terday, out of the blue, because I wasn't particularly impressed with what =
I was hearing from the point of view of reality, it suddenly occurred to me=
to use the equalizer. I was very quickly hearing a wet dripping rain sound=
that was far closer to what I was hoping to achieve! You may all think wha=
t an idiot, but to me it was unnerving, because I realised that previous re=
cordings that had been binned, may not have been as bad as thought at the t=
ime.
> Just curious
> Max
>
|