Yes, too much compression is the big boogaroo. (Spud 
sighs and shakes head at injuducious application of compression in MyMusic).
As a youthful 66 year old…
music is off my menu. I can NEVER understand the lyrics. Pisses me off pretty bad.
I stopped listening to music a lot of years ago. I really miss it, but I refuse to try to process what is impossible to understand. There is also the issue of not knowing what the actual music is supposed to sound like. Maybe if CI ever comes into my life, things might change…my 2 cents…
1 Like
I don’t also understand the lyrics. I lost my hearing when I was 3/4 years old so I can’t really remember how the natural sound is supposed to sound (no pun intended). It’s amazing that SpudGunner remembers how the music is supposed to sound for the natural hearing. Maybe Demant/Oticon should invite him to Denmark and cooperate with him to develop MyMusic v2.
1 Like
In theory, it may sound right that you don’t want too much compression for minimal processing in a music program. But it got me curious so I simulated 2 profiles using my personal audiogram, one for the OPN S1 and the other for the More 1, same rechargeable with double vented bass fitting, then I added the Music program for the OPN S1, and the MyMusic program for the More 1 (Music program is not available in the More 1 menu anymore, of course).
I want to compare them side by side to see how the compression ratios between the 2 programs compare. And how close they are to the 1:1 ratio (input:output).
Below are the gain charts of the 2, the OPN S1 Music program first, then the More 1 MyMusic program next. I turned on the CR (Compression Ratio) display as well so we can see what they are. I don’t know why there are only 2 rows of CR for 3 rows of gain (Loud, Moderate and Soft). I’m assuming that the CR under Loud is for Loud, the CR under Moderate is for moderate, and the CR for Soft is not shown. Maybe the CR for Soft is 1:1 across the board or something.
The assumption here is that if the More1 Music program is restored, its gain curve would look the same as the OPN S1 Music program (for the same audiogram from a patient). I don’t know if this is a good assumption or not, but it’s the only thing available to do side by side comparison at this point.
A few observations are summarized below:
-
The gain curves of the OPN S1 Music program is a lot less aggressive in the high ends compared to the More1 MyMusic program.
-
Even with the OPN S1 Music program, the compression ratios (CR) are not always 1.0.
-
Actually, the Loud CRs seems to be higher in the OPN S1 Music program compared to the Loud CRs in the More 1 MyMusic. I wonder if this makes MyMusic more dynamic if the louder sounds are not subdued as much compared to the original Music.
-
On the other hand, the Moderate CRs in the OPN S1 Music seems to be slightly lower overall compared to the Moderate CRs in the More 1 MyMusic. Maybe this is why the Music program is deemed to be preferable over MyMusic?
1 Like
@Volusiano: Are you forgetting about knee points, whether they are soft or hard, attack and release times, etc?, These are the parameters of compression that really affect the pleasantness/unpleasantness of the effect, and not just CR.
Perhaps I should have been more careful about my choice of words, and, instead of saying “too much compression”, I should have just left it as “the injudicious application of compression parameters”. I believe it was @Um_bongo that once alluded to the fact in one of his posts that applying compression is something of an art. My experience of applying compression in a musical, versus hearing device context suggests that he’s correct.
Theory aside, a big sample of 2 members
(@flashb1024 and @SpudGunner) would argue forcefully that MyMusic sounds much less dynamic to our ears. MyMusic sounds louder, yes - more dynamic, a definite no.
1 Like
Now I’m curious: how can one compare the effects of compression in an open vented acoustic system with compression in a mould coupled, minimally vented (1mm) system like I wear?
The knee points seem to be built into the table already. We can work through the math in 1 frequency band. Let’s pick the 1 KHz band as seen below in the screenshot. MPO there is 112 dB (not shown here but shown if CR is unselected.
For reference, anything below 45 dB is Soft, from 45 to 65 dB is Moderate, and from 65 to 80 dB is Loud, according to the Genie 2 online help.
-
The first compression ratio below Soft of 45 (starting at 0) is 1, gain is 25, so the 2 coordinate points (input_start:output_start, input_end:output_end) are (0:25, 45:70)
-
The second compression ratio between Soft of 45 and Moderate of 65 is 1.4, gain is 15, so the coordinates are (45:60, 65:74.3) -> the 60=45+15, the 74.3=(45+15)+((65-45)/1.4)
-
The third compression ratio between Moderate of 65 to Loud of 80 is 2.1, gain is 8, so the coordinates are (65:73, 80:80.14) -> the 73=65+8, the 80.14=(65+8)+((80-65)/2.1)
-
The fourth compression ratio between Loud of 80 to MPO of 112 is 1, gain is 0, so the coordinates are (80:80, 112:112)
The bottom screenshot is the graph of this compression chart for 1 Khz.
1 Like
The compression ratios would probably be different when the fitting is factored in. However they determine what the CR should be with the fitting factored in is voodoo magic, I guess, based on whatever data they collect in their lab results. That’s why I made sure I use the same fitting types for the OPN S1 and the More 1 in my analysis above.
That alone can explain why they don’t want to give users access to modify the compression ratios at will in the first place, let alone considering other things like the fitting rationale factors, feedback factors, spatial acoustics, transient noise management, noise suppression, and what-have-you…
@Volusiano: I’m sorry to inform you that I don’t understand the math at all, except the most rudimentary aspects. That’s why I said applying compression in a musical context.
In a recording studio, we use our ears to determine:
- At what volume should the compression kick in,
- How quickly should the compression be applied;
- How much of the gain loss should be compensated,
- At what point in the sound envelope should compression be released,
- How fast should it be released, and
- Should the compression be applied pre- or post- EQ?
But we’re artists, working within an intuitive framework - we’re not engineers. Our measures of success are qualitative, subjective, and based on aesthetics. I’m not sure how one would quantify this.
It’s well to remember that my objections to the results I get using the MyMusic program are aesthetic, and highly subjective. They’re in no way based on engineering criteria.
Yeah, we’re talking about compression differently for sure.
Below is an example of how compression is applied in an engineering kind of way for hearing aid. You can see there that for input volume between 0-40 dB (softer inputs), the gain is 25, but the compression ratio is 1. When the input volume is between 40 to 100 dB (moderate to loud inputs), the compression ratio changes to 2 (2 dB change in the input for every 1 dB change on the output). In this very simplified case, there is only 1 knee point at 40 dB.
The idea of using compression is that your hearing may need a 30 dB gain up to 40 dB input level to compensate for your hearing loss at a particular frequency. But if the input volume is loud enough, then your hearing doesn’t need the 30 dB gain anymore like for the softer input volume. So the compression is set higher to “tame down” the effect of the gain so that it’s not a 30 dB gain anymore going forward on louder input volume. It’s now gradually come down to only a 10 dB gain when it gets to the 80 dB input volume, and eventually down to 0 dB gain at 100 dB input volume.
1 Like
@Volusiano: I’m not sure how this would affect what @flashb1024 and I are hearing in MyMusic that we dislike.
How would your chart affect the sound as heard by the HA wearer?
You yourself wrote that you are professional musician and that you remember how the music sounded to you before your hearing loss. Also you seem to understand the fine differences between the various types and frequencies of musical sounds. Therefore I made a suggestion Oticon should strive for your input to perfect MyMusic program so any music will completely sound close to natural.
1 Like
The whole thing started when I was suggesting that @flashb1024 try to copy the gains in the Music of the OPN S over to a program in the More to mimic and maybe recreate the Music program in the More. But Flash said that he did try that, but even if he can mimic the gain values, the CR values don’t necessarily become the same as those in the OPN S Music program. Ideally you want the CR values to match as well so that the recreation is exactly the same.
So both Flash and I were talking about the CR strictly in the sense of how these values are set in Genie 2 for the Music program. But you chimed in about too much compression is not good for music. And there has been lots of similar comments in the past in various threads on this forum that people want NO compression at all (along with no signal processing) when it comes to listening to music in a music program.
I guess the engineering part of me wants to clarify that no compression at all is not necessarily the ideal approach like most people think (in terms of hearing aid compression in the engineering sense). The other part is that it got me curious about how the CR values differ between the original Music and the MyMusic program. So that’s why I tried to do an A/B comparison to find out.
Through this process, I guess I’ve learned that compression to you (and other folks who prefer little to no compression for music) is really not the same as compression as it applies to hearing aids. Well, technically, I think it’s the same, but it’s applied in different ways for different purposes. But nevertheless, maybe it was helpful that this discussion sheds some light to the differences in how we see and talk about in terms of compression, for music and for hearing aids.
The bottom line is that you do want and need some amount of compression in the engineering sense in hearing aids when the input volumes get loud enough, even for music. Otherwise, you probably can’t tolerate hearing music on loud passages because it’d be too loud for you to enjoy.
I edited and added the following paragraph to my previous post that explains why compression is used in hearing aids, but probably after you read the original post without it added in. It should explain your question of "How (the compression in) your chart affect the sound as heard by the HA wearer?"
1 Like
That’s very complimentary. I think, in fact, that Oticon should take your suggestion, but recruiting talent far superior to my own (if I have any!).
But just to be clear - I didn’t say I remembered how the music sounded before my hearing loss. I think I said something to the effect that the sound of Norah Jones’ singing is burned into my engrams. This is true, but the sound that’s “burned in” is what I heard through my AKG headphones, after EQing her tracks on my my mixing board to compensate for my hearing loss.
That EQd sound, repeated hundreds of times over as I arranged a few of her tunes for solo, fingerstyle guitar, is what my brain remembers. It’s the best quality neural signal of her music that I could send to my brain, far better in quality than what a tiny HA receiver is capable of delivering.
That’s what I remember, and I remember it well because I memorized it. So when I listen to the same tracks through my More1s using the old Music program, I can get a sound in my ears that’s not as good as the sound through my AKG “cans”, but it’s close enough to be really pleasant. It is, IMO, a faithful rendition of what I heard while I was arranging her stuff.
Listening to the same tracks, through the same hearing aids, but using the MyMusic program, here are the differences I hear:
- an unpleasant “boominess” in the lower mids which I believe @flashb1024 described as distortion,
- a tin-cannyness in the upper mids that is, simultaneously, both loud and indistinct. This sound quality doesn’t convey the dynamics of the music well, at all,
- a round, pleasant bottom end can be “tubby” when it needs to be more distinct, especially when reproducing a fretless bass line. Begins to sound like the bass from a big, but cheap K-Mart boom box after a while, and
- an overall muffled, indistinct quality to the sound, even though it’s loud (mushiness might be a suitable descriptor).
That’s what I hear, in relation to my reference memories, which are of my board’s output, through a parametric EQ, into excellent AKG headphones that deliver a lot of high quality sound to my damaged hearing apparatus.
The difference between the two programs - other than the sound I hear - is that I can actually manipulate the sound of the Music program satisfactorily with the simple EQ of the ON app. I can “get Norah back” with just a little tweaking in the app.
Not so with the MyMusic program. The sound of that program is quite resistant to shaping using the available EQ sliders.
Just to be clear, that’s not the same as saying that I remember the sounds I heard when my hearing was normal, though.
I just have finished rereading my initial posts about the MyMusic program. Wow! Has my opinion ever changed after a few days of playing with it!
I’m very interested now in getting a clearer understanding of
- What factors drove my initial impression, and
- What happened with my ears, brain, and psyche to cause the 180° shift in my opinion?
Am I ever glad that I reserved for myself the right to change my mind!
[Addendum: I’m not crazy! I have just fired up a few cuts by Doyle Dykes, who is a Taylor signature artist. I listened to the cuts, and then played my own Taylor for comparison. It’s going to take me a while to find the words, but I think part of what’s going on here is an habituation effect. MyMusic hits me with an initial “wall of sound” compared to the previous program. It sounds rich, round, full, and bassy at first. It’s an unexpected shock to hear so much musical sound through HAs.
It’s only after the initial shine has worn off that I begin to hear the distortion, funny dynamics, and “wooliness”. More to follow!]
1 Like
The standard I/O charts don’t apply to the way Oticon does things though.
THey’ve used a system of ‘Floating Point linearity’ for years to basically draw a 45degree (1:1) line over a short period average time window. The idea behind this was to allow the aid to show the benefits of loudness growth (especially in speech) rather than compressing down the dynamic range of the output.
There’s a difference of opinion within fitting algorithms - some say that for maximum intelligibility, all speech should be amplified to equal loudness levels. Others say you should retain the natural cadence through changes intensity. Oticon fit the latter argument.
Music has more dramatic changes in intensity than speech and ‘should’ sound less molested than with the manufacturers going for equal loudness solutions.
3 Likes
Well, If it gives your engineering soul any relief, absolutely NO compression is no good in instrumental music, either. There are always little hot spots to smooth out, or some decay curves that are too steep, or some artifacts from micing up a guitar or amp that need the voodoo of compression. (Good word for !)
Pre- or -post EQ is the big decision - not no compression at all. For sure, I think that compression is different in the two different contexts, but I agree that rhere are a lot of valuable lessons to be learned in sorting it all through. Thanks for taking the time to explain the engineering side of it ! (Insert engineer joke here)
Yes, your assumption is correct. The OPN S Music program & original More Music program are afaik the same.
Absolutely true, that!
Actually, they don’t want us “USERS” getting into fitting at all.
But the CR’s should be accessible for qualified providers. I don’t go back far enough with Genie to know, but earlier versions , including the one used for the original OPN had access to the CR’s, as does Phonak Target, and I’m sure most other mfgs.
Actually @colorrama88 has a thread on Widex for musicians, in which he inserts salient points from 2 of the leading Musically trained audi’s:
I think that says it all, and here is another great read, if you have an opportunity from our Phonak friends
Completely on point.
I raved about it on 1st listen, as well after streaming some hi rez files, but soon came back to earth, after listening over speakers and live piano.
Spudmeister, you have captured the essense of the MyMusic mystery.
1 Like