live speech mapping
which is better live speech mapping or real ear measurement
They give different information so I wouldn't say one is better than the other.
I would say that live speech mapping gives you more useful applicable for speech that would be beneficial to the patient. Where real ear tells you what amount of gain you have for varying inputs, the speech mapping shows you what the hearing aid is doing in real-time for a speech signal.
copy that. It's apples to oranges, and I don't really see the sense in comparing them. It sounds like maybe you have to choose between 2 hearing aids that each have those features. If that's the case, I'd go with the live speech mapping over real ear measurement any day. In my opinion, live speech mapping gives me much more knowledge about what is going on with the hearing aids, than real ear measurement does. Just my .2. Good luck
Hmm,, both are different entities and informative in their own way .. definitely for hearing aid programing and real life applications. i will advice speech mapping over real ear ..
Live speech mapping is REM using speech as the stimulus source.
Originally Posted by Hask12
LSM is an evolution of the original tone/noise based verification methods to accurately evaluate the advancing complexity of hearing aids. If you play a test tone to a modern aid, the feedback manager will choose not to amplify it. If you play it white noise, the speech detection system will not recognise it and amplify it. If you play it garbled speech, your sample has to be long enough to be meaningful.
OR you can use LSM and put the output in a range of performance that 'hits' the patient prescription given their residual dynamic range.
Still doesn't mean that the test is representative of where the patient 'likes' the sound though.