Sound Quality Improvement for Hearing Aids in Presence of Multiple Inputs

  • Asutosh KarEmail author
  • Ankita Anand
  • Jan Østergaard
  • Søren Holdt Jensen
  • M. N. S. Swamy


Modern-day hearing aids are capable of receiving acoustic signals over a wireless link and also from the surroundings through the microphone. If the hearing aid receives input only from the acoustic environment, feedback cancellation proceeds according to the existing methodologies for bias reduction. However, the wirelessly received signal and the acoustic environment input, when emitted from the same source, can be very similar to each other or with a time-delayed version of each other, thereby having a high correlation between them. Both inputs can also be emitted from different sources and, thus, be less correlated with each other. In the aforementioned scenarios, acoustic confusion can occur for the user as the hearing aid receives both signals simultaneously. To improve the output signal quality and to reduce bias in an adaptive feedback cancellation system with a wirelessly received signal as well as an acoustic environment input, we propose a cost function, and the optimization of the feed-forward path and of the shaping filter for the wireless signal. The feed-forward path is designed to be a cascade of the required acoustic enhancement along with an FIR filter. We derive expressions for an optimum shaping filter and for an optimized feed-forward path. Improvement in loudspeaker output signal quality, normalized misalignment and maximum stable gain for each of the above-mentioned scenarios is assessed through numerical simulations.


Adaptive filters Feedback cancellation Hearing aid Convergence rate Misalignment. 



This work is partially funded by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under the Grant agreement number ITN-GA-2012-316969. The authors would like to thank Prof. Toon van Waterschoot (KU Leuven, Belgium) for his valuable suggestions throughout this work.


  1. 1.
    A. Anand, A. Kar, M.N.S. Swamy, Design and analysis of a BLPC vocoder-based adaptive feedback cancellation with probe noise. Appl. Acoust. 115, 196–208 (2017). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Bramslow, An objective estimate of the perceived quality of reproduced sound in normal and impaired hearing. Acta Acust. United Acust. 90, 1007–1018 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D.K. Bustamante, T.L. Worrall, M.J. Williamson, Measurement and adaptive suppression of acoustic feedback in hearing aids, in International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 1989. ICASSP-89, vol. 3, pp. 2017–2020 (1989).
  4. 4.
    H.F. Chi, S.X. Gao, S.D. Soli, A. Alwan, Band-limited feedback cancellation with a modified filtered-X LMS algorithm for hearing aids. Speech Commun. 39(1), 147–161 (2003). CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Dillon, Hearing Aids (Boomerang Press, Turramurra, 2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J.E. Greenberg, P.M. Zurek, M. Brantley, Evaluation of feedback-reduction algorithms for hearing aids. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108(5), 2366–2376 (2000). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Guo, Analysis, design, and evaluation of acoustic feedback cancellation systems for hearing aids. Ph.D dissertation, Department of Electronic Systems, Aalborg University (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Guo, T. Elmedyb, S.H. Jensen, J. Jensen, On acoustic feedback cancellation using probe noise in multiple-microphone and single-loudspeaker systems. IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 19(5), 283–286 (2012)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Guo, S.H. Jensen, J. Jensen, Novel acoustic feedback cancellation approaches in hearing aid applications using probe noise and probe noise enhancement. IEEE Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 20(9), 2549–2563 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    ITU, Perceptual Evaluation of Speech Quality (PESQ): An objective method for end-to-end speech quality assessment of narrow-band telephone networks and speech codecs - P.862 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ITU-T, Methods for subjective determination of transmission quality. rec. P.800 (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P.C. Loizou, Speech Enhancement: Theory and Practice (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J.A. Maxwell, P.M. Zurek, Reducing acoustic feedback in hearing aids. IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process. 3(4), 304–313 (1995). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    C.R.C. Nakagawa, Control of feedback for assistive listening devices. Ph.D. dissertation, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Curtin University (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    C.R.C. Nakagawa, S. Nordholm, W.Y. Yan, Analysis of two microphone method for feedback cancellation. IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 22(1), 35–39 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    C.R.C. Nakagawa, S. Nordholm, W.Y. Yan, New insights into optimal acoustic feedback cancellation. IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 20(9), 869–872 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    T. Painter, A. Spanias, Perceptual coding of digital audio. Proc. IEEE 88(4), 451–515 (2000). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    A. Spriet, I. Proudler, M. Moonen, J. Wouters, Adaptive feedback cancellation in hearing aids with linear prediction of the desired signal. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 53(10), 3749–3763 (2005). MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    T. van Waterschoot, M. Moonen, Fifty years of acoustic feedback control: state of the art and future challenges. Proc. IEEE 99(2), 288–327 (2011). CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Communication EngineeringIndian Institute of Information Technology, Design and ManufacturingKancheepuram, ChennaiIndia
  2. 2.IEEE DelhiNew DelhiIndia
  3. 3.Department of Electronic SystemsAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark
  4. 4.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringConcordia UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations