I don't have the equipment to be that exact. I fit on a general principle that keeps in mind that I am working with a musician with an expanded representation for sound that is different than non-musician's. They may not like the sound of an aid precisely because I haven't matched a certain band of frequencies as well as I could if I tried to shift the response of the aid off the more traditional "pure tone" recommendations. Pure tones don't occur in nature, so why should we be married to the idea that people hear the best when we match the prescription formulas or the audiogram to a psychological, subjective system.
I've noticed that some people are spend too much time on the specifics rather than the general priniciple. I'm not concerned with exact measurements, but I am concern with the difference in programming that may be necessary because of vastly different auditory systems based on environmental or genetic influences.
Please don't get hung up on the specifics, see the point for what it was.
>To: Barbara Reynolds <br_auditory@HOTMAIL.COM>
>Subject: Re: Inexpensive hearing aids - Consideration of Piano harmonics
>Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 19:39:09 -0600 (CST)
>Barb, I'm inpressed if you have instrumentation to fit to exact tones such as
>"2048" which is, by the way, a C of 512 which is not a temered C so would
>usually be inappropriate to fit as a tempered C is at 523.25. Interestingly,
>this makes your C at 2048 come out at 2093 which is only three cycles less than
>being out by the same amount your 2048 would be from the 2000 of the audiometer.
>As an aside, if we multiply the A which is the more commonly used not for
>tempering scales, that has your A at 1600. In Europe rather than using 440
>currently many people now use 442 which brings the 1600 to 1608. Of course, all
>of this becomes of questionable value either in a porrly tempered scale, with a
>piano either flat or sharp in pitch (this applies to other instruments as well)
>or with instruments which are not tempered or which are not equal temered.
>Since the band spreads on audiometers are standardized to neural response etc.
>al be it sometimes after the fact, I am still left with the question of how much
>good this actually does for a client. I also wonder about these single cycle
>frequency adjustments to aids.
>Tom Brennan KD5VIJ, CCC-A/SLP, R/D - AU
>web page http://titan.sfasu.edu/~g_brennantg/sonicpage.html