Complex QMF resolution must be supplemented to match auditory frequency selectivity

Evidence

A number of studies have evaluated the effects of masking in listeners with hearing loss, with a general consensus being that listeners with hearing loss experience poorer frequency selectivity and a greater susceptibility to masking than their normal-hearing counterparts (e.g., Florentine, Buus, Scharf, & Zwicker, 1980; Leek & Summers, 1993). The high stimulus levels used may be part of the reason for poor frequency selectivity in listeners with hearing loss, due to the worsening of frequency selectivity with increasing level. However, even when stimuli are equated between the two groups of listeners and threshold elevation is taken into account, listeners with hearing loss appear to experience an additional reduction in frequency selectivity due to their auditory pathology (Dubno & Schaefer, 1995). — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 558 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Analysis window length of 10-30 ms is chosen to match auditory time-frequency resolution; DFT-based windowing explains basic auditory frequency resolution properties; Hearing loss impairs frequency selectivity beyond what stimulus level differences explain. — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 558 (+1 more)

Related

• Hearing loss impairs frequency selectivity beyond what stimulus level differences explain. (similarity 0.88)
• Impaired frequency selectivity and lost suppression increase masking and reduce spectral contrasts (similarity 0.88)
• The ear’s frequency selectivity is imperfect and worsens at higher frequencies (similarity 0.87)
• Reduced frequency selectivity hurts speech perception less than reduced audibility does (similarity 0.85)
• Impaired frequency selectivity, suppression, and fluctuation use jointly degrade hearing (similarity 0.85)
• DFT-based windowing explains basic auditory frequency resolution properties (similarity 0.85)
• Frequency selectivity in normal-hearing listeners worsens at high sound levels (similarity 0.85)
• Hearing loss impairs masking through three compounding spectral mechanisms (similarity 0.84)
• Wider peripheral tuning from hearing loss suppresses low-frequency fluctuation amplitude (similarity 0.84)
• Cochlear frequency selectivity decreases as sound level increases (similarity 0.83)
• Hearing loss reduces audibility and restricts usable bandwidth for temporal processing (similarity 0.83)
• Auditory spectrum computation begins with FFT then emulates hearing sensitivity via filtering and weighting. (similarity 0.83)
• Low-frequency maskers mask high-frequency signals more than the reverse, and this worsens with intensity. (similarity 0.83)
• Auditory filter bandwidth scales nonlinearly with center frequency (similarity 0.83)
• The human hearing system compromises between frequency and time resolution, unlike ideal filters (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• The auditory spectrum differs from the physical power spectrum in resolution and shape #expands (0.85)
• Hearing loss impairs frequency selectivity beyond what stimulus level differences explain. #expands (0.82) — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 558