Mass and stiffness affect on the peculiar characteristics of transmission of the middle ear and the distinctive behavior of the cochlear mechanics. Applying the principle of the mass and stiffness, the band-pass characteristic transfer function of the middle ear has been explained. The greatest transfer function of the middle ear, approximately 24-29 dB, is observed at 1-2 kHz in both cat and human species. However, at lower frequencies, the transfer function was disturbed by the stiffness of the middle ear primarily due to middle ear cavity. At higher frequencies, the transfer function was disturbed by the stiffness of the middle ear primarily due to middle ear bones. Several examples, such as an acoustic reflex, otitis media, and otosclerosis are discussed. For understanding the traveling wave of the basilar membrane, different place tuning at certain stimulus frequencies, contrastingly shaped basilar membrane to the cochlear duct, and the structural and physical characteristics of the whole cochlear partition were reviewed in terms of changing width, mass, and stiffness from the base to apex. Being about ten times wider, more massive, and one hundredfold stiffer at the base than the apex, the nature of the cochlear partition to absorb high-frequency energy changes in fluid pressure declines toward the apex. Consequently, at the base of the cochlea, high frequencies stimuli are decoded while low frequencies stimuli are decoded at the apex of the cochlea. Due to these characteristics of the cochlear partition, the direction of the traveling wave was also proved to be in the fashion of base-to-apex always.
Animals ; Basilar Membrane ; Cats ; Cochlea ; Cochlear Duct ; Ear, Middle* ; Humans ; Mechanics ; Otitis Media ; Otosclerosis ; Reflex, Acoustic

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To prevent noise induced hearing losses caused by listening to music with personal listening devices for young adults, this study was aimed to measure output levels of an MP3 and to identify preferred listening levels (PLLs) depending on earphone types, music genres, and listening durations. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty-two normal hearing young adults (mean=18.82, standard deviation=0.57) participated. Each participant was asked to select his or her most PLLs when listened to Korean ballade or dance music with an earbud or an over-the-ear earphone for 30 or 60 minutes. One side of earphone was connected to the participant’s better ear and the other side was connected to a sound level meter via a 2 or 6 cc-couplers. Depending on earphone types, music genres, and listening durations, loudness A-weighted equivalent (LAeq) and loudness maximum time-weighted with A-frequency sound levels in dBA were measured. RESULTS: Neither main nor interaction effects of the PLLs among the three factors were significant. Overall output levels of earbuds were about 10-12 dBA greater than those of over-the-ear earphones. The PLLs were 1.73 dBA greater for earbuds than over-the-ear earphones. The average PLL for ballad was higher than for dance music. The PLLs at LAeq for both music genres were the greatest at 0.5 kHz followed by 1, 0.25, 2, 4, 0.125, 8 kHz in the order. CONCLUSIONS: The PLLs were not different significantly when listening to Korean ballad or dance music as functions of earphone types, music genres, and listening durations. However, over-the-ear earphones seemed to be more suitable to prevent noise induce hearing loss when listening to music, showing lower PLLs, possibly due to isolation from the background noise by covering ears.
Dancing ; Ear ; Hearing ; Hearing Loss ; Humans ; MP3-Player ; Music ; Noise ; Young Adult

Objectives: . This study evaluated the electroacoustic characteristics of smartphone-based hearing aid applications (apps). Methods: . We investigated hearing aid apps based on processing delay measurements, hearing instrument testing, simulated real ear measurements, and a head-and-torso simulator. Results: . Many apps exceeded the recommended level for processing delay. Hearing instrument testing showed the highest amplification characteristics and the best sound quality when a hearing aid was used, followed by the high-end apps and then the low-end apps. The simulated real ear measurements results showed that the high-end apps had a better ability to match the amplification targets than the low-end apps, but there was no consistent pattern among apps when controlling the output. Only a few apps could improve the signal-to-noise ratio in the head-and-torso simulator. Conclusion . Most of the apps showed relatively poor electroacoustic performance in comparison with hearing aids. Generalizing access to hearing care through hearing aid apps induces a wide diversity of hearing performance with no fixed standard for reliability. However, we expect their overall quality to improve over the next few years.