Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!optilink!elliott From: elliott@optilink.UUCP (Paul Elliott x225) Newsgroups: comp.dsp Subject: Re: DSP Hearing Aids? Summary: Scientific American (November 1990) Hearing Aid Article Message-ID: <4713@optilink.UUCP> Date: 25 Oct 90 17:39:12 GMT References: <952@eplunix.UUCP> <10810@goofy.Apple.COM> <15797@rasp.eng.cam.ac.uk> <3559@idunno.Princeton.EDU> Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA Lines: 35 For those who haven't already seen it, the latest (November? the cover story is about electron traps) issue of Scientific American has a brief article (near the back, I forget which section) on cochlear implants. It mentions their history and features some newer DSP multi-channel efforts. Interesting stuff! Allow me to encourage the continuation of this discussion. I used to design hearing aids (not DSP though), and find the subject fascinating. One huge problem with DSP techniques is the pragmatic matter of operating power requirements (high power => big, heavy, short battery life). People with profound hearing losses will usually (but not always) accept any help available, no matter how bulky. These cases are also where DSP methods may be appropriate. Has anyone managed to develop a competetive (or at least promising) DSP design that could be implemented in an on-the-ear or in-the-ear aid? It seems to me that the lessons learned with DSP in the lab could be best implemented in a commercial (and cosmetically acceptable) aid using analog techniques. One research project I was working on (about 10 years ago) was the implementation of multi-frequency-channel amplification and dynamic range compression in a hearing aid using DSP methods. Not surprisingly, the technology wasn't really ready for us to turn it into a commercially acceptable product. How much progress has been made in the intervening years? Comments? -- Paul M. Elliott Optilink Corporation (707) 795-9444 {uunet, pyramid, tekbspa}!optilink!elliott "an archetypal entity..., superimposed on our culture by a cosmic template."