{ "name": "Assistive Listening Knowledge Base", "url": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org", "publisher": "Equal Access Audio", "method": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/about/", "fundingLabels": { "Independent": "Universities, public research bodies, independent authors, and hearing-loss organisations testing on their own account. Who paid is named where the source says.", "Manufacturer": "Produced or paid for by a company that makes or sells the products concerned.", "Standards body": "Standards organisations and specification bodies. The Bluetooth SIG, which writes the Bluetooth specifications, is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark; its marketing material is labelled Trade body.", "Nonprofit advocacy": "Charities and associations that speak for people with hearing loss, including their guidance and device lists.", "Trade body": "Industry associations whose members sell products or services, and their marketing material, including the Bluetooth SIG’s.", "Government": "Laws, regulations, building codes and government-funded guidance." }, "sources": [ { "id": "avantree-2026-auracoil-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/avantree-2026-auracoil-guide/", "title": "Interactive User Guide: AuraCoil (VRC-390)", "authors": "Avantree", "publisher": "Avantree (support page)", "date": "2026-10-13", "kind": "Manufacturer user guide", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Avantree, which sells the AuraCoil receiver as well as Auracast transmitters, including its Venucast range for venues)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://avantree.com/pages/auracoil-interactive-user-guide", "summary": "The maker's setup and troubleshooting guide for AuraCoil, a personal Auracast receiver with a built-in neckloop for hearing aids and implants with a telecoil.", "findings": [ "Describes AuraCoil as a receiver with a built-in neckloop that passes public Auracast broadcasts to hearing aids or a compatible cochlear implant in T or MT mode, with no separate receiver or cable; the listener must wear the complete neckloop around the neck.", "Says the receiver joins a nearby public broadcast automatically, that holding the channel button for 5 seconds switches to another broadcast, and that \"Encrypted broadcasts are not supported yet\": a future phone app, not yet available, is to let it join them over Bluetooth Low Energy.", "Gives volume and left/right balance controls, advises starting at a low volume and keeping the whole neckloop around the neck when sound is quiet, uneven or cutting out, and tells listeners who hear nothing to ask venue staff whether the broadcast is active and public.", "Gives up to 20 hours of listening per charge, using a charging dock; a replacement battery is sold separately." ], "limitations": "A maker's guide for its own product, with no measurements: neither the guide nor the product page (https://avantree.com/products/auracoil-auracast-personal-receiver) gives a field strength, frequency response or latency for the neckloop. The product page, published on 14 May 2026, offered the receiver for pre-order on 10 October 2026 and names Auri, Bettear, Williams AV and Avantree transmitters as compatible in its image captions. The date is the guide footer's printed last-update date, 13 October 2026, also reflected in its HTML version label.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "rnid-2026-gideon-theatre-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-2026-gideon-theatre-auracast/", "title": "Attending theatres with Auracast: Gideon’s Story", "authors": "RNID; interview with Gideon", "publisher": "RNID", "date": "2026-10-12", "kind": "Listener account and advocacy guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (RNID; published alongside a theatre playbook created with GN Hearing; separate interview funding unstated)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://rnid.org.uk/2026/10/attending-theatres-with-auracast-gideons-story/", "summary": "One experienced hearing aid user describes clearer theatre dialogue alongside coverage, reconnection and audio-mix problems at two theatres.", "findings": [ "Gideon uses ReSound Vivia hearing aids and an iPhone 17 Pro Max. The account describes two theatre visits, rather than a recruited trial.", "At the first theatre, dialogue was clearer but reception at the seats used was unreliable; Gideon reports reconnecting about ten times. RNID says the theatre had tested standalone receivers but not hearing aids.", "At the second theatre, speech and music were transmitted before the show to let listeners check reception. Gideon reports a stable signal and fairly easy reconnection after leaving the auditorium.", "Gideon normally mutes the hearing aid microphones to focus on streamed sound. At a musical, music was absent from the broadcast, so the microphones had to be unmuted to hear it properly. Adjusting a child’s settings at the interval improved that child’s experience of the second half.", "RNID recommends a live audio feed before performances so customers can connect and adjust settings, clear names for transmitters serving different seating areas, staff support and consultation with people with hearing loss." ], "limitations": "One named listener’s account, including a child’s experience; no controlled comparison or hearing aid firmware, app version, microphone levels or measured speech scores. It accompanies a playbook made with a hearing aid manufacturer; interview-specific funding is not stated.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "hearinglife-2026-hearing-experience-index", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hearinglife-2026-hearing-experience-index/", "title": "New HearingLife Survey Finds Hearing Challenges Can Mean Missing the Moments That Matter Most (Hearing Experience Index)", "authors": "HearingLife", "publisher": "HearingLife (press release distributed by PR Newswire)", "date": "2026-10-05", "kind": "Survey (press release)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Manufacturer (HearingLife, a US hearing care company with more than 600 centres and part of the Demant Group, which it calls a global leader in hearing healthcare; HearingLife commissioned the survey and does not name the polling firm)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-hearinglife-survey-finds-hearing-challenges-can-mean-missing-the-moments-that-matter-most-302897822.html", "summary": "A hearing care company's online survey of 1,950 US adults aged 60 and over about hearing in public places, including whether they know that venues offer hearing technology.", "findings": [ "About the Survey names the eight state oversamples as Arizona, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. The release gives 1,950 participants in total and 750 in the national sample, without identifying the exact item/weighted base of the headline percentages.", "23% of adults aged 60 and over were aware that some public venues offer technology designed to improve hearing experiences, and 84% had never used technology or an accommodation to help them hear better in public places.", "73% agreed that public spaces are not designed with hearing accessibility in mind, rising to 90% among those who personally have hearing difficulty.", "Among adults with hearing difficulty, 38% had missed or struggled to follow an announcement while travelling and 30% important medical information.", "The company concludes that venues can make hearing accessibility more visible and available, and that individuals can learn more about the tools available; it encourages people with difficulty to see a hearing care professional." ], "limitations": "A press release from a company that sells hearing care: the question wording, the polling firm and full tables are not published, and the release does not say which venue technologies were meant. The 23% and 84% figures cover all adults aged 60 and over, with or without hearing difficulty. Online fieldwork ran from 29 June to 27 July 2026; the stated margin of error (plus or minus 3.6 points) is for the national sample of 750, while the 1,950 total includes oversamples in eight states.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "auri-system-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/auri-system-manual/", "title": "Auri System Manual", "authors": "Listen Technologies and Ampetronic", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (online documentation)", "date": "2026-10-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Manufacturer user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies and Ampetronic, makers of Auri)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/docs/auri-user-manual/", "summary": "Instructions for configuring and checking Auri broadcasts in adjacent and larger listening spaces.", "findings": [ "The Introduction describes both dedicated receivers and direct reception by emerging Auracast-compatible hearing aids, earbuds, headphones and phones. The Accessories section describes neckloops for telecoil-equipped hearing aids and cochlear implants, and standard 3.5 mm headphones or earbuds for the RX1 receiver.", "Recommends naming broadcasts for their coverage area, such as a room name, and reducing transmitter power in small rooms to limit signal in adjacent areas.", "Calls for coverage validation under normal, fully occupied conditions and careful power management where many Auracast systems operate nearby.", "Describes dedicated receivers with headphones or neckloops, broadcast selection and optional encryption. Range depends on receiving-device sensitivity, obstruction, the building and other radio traffic.", "Configuring the Transmitter asks for representative audio sources during setup. Troubleshooting, under There is no audio, asks users to check the selected broadcast, connected source and input routing.", "Transmitter installation specifies PoE or, if unavailable, a USB-C power supply capable of at least 500 mA. The no-audio troubleshooting section asks users to check the selected broadcast, transmitter power, connected audio source and configured stream sources.", "The archived manual documents routing and broadcast selection but provides no emergency takeover procedure for listeners’ devices and no evacuation or backup-power endurance test.", "The Output settings document two independently enabled radios, each configurable as mono or stereo with its own broadcast name. The manual recommends a unique name per output for different content and 14 characters to avoid scrolling on RX1.", "The Stream Name setting supplies Program Info, which some assistants may display but Auri receivers do not. Radio mode, Broadcast Name and sample-rate changes restart the radios; other makers’ receivers may require manual reconnection." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer instructions, not an independent hotel trial. The online text can change; date is its displayed update. No comparative listener results or room-partition changeover test is reported.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "hotels-and-conference-centres", "emergency-announcements", "auracast-multiple-streams", "venue-self-checks", "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "hlaa-2026-auracast-systems", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hlaa-2026-auracast-systems/", "title": "Auracast Systems (technology and accessibility page)", "authors": "Hearing Loss Association of America", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America (HLAA)", "date": "2026-09-28", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Hearing Loss Association of America, a US consumer organisation for people with hearing loss; its site asks for memberships and donations and lists corporate partners and advertising)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/technology-and-accessibility/auracast/", "summary": "HLAA's explainer on Auracast for consumers and venues, including its reading of how the ADA applies and advice on stream quality settings.", "findings": [ "The compatibility FAQ asks how to tell whether a hearing device supports Auracast, and directs readers to model documentation, their provider or the manufacturer. It distinguishes enabled devices from ready devices awaiting an update; it does not verify individual models.", "What makes Auracast different? describes broadcast reception without conventional pairing and presents direct reception through compatible hearing devices as more discreet than collecting, wearing and returning extra equipment. This is advocacy guidance without a listener sample.", "States that the ADA does not approve or reject particular hearing technologies. It requires venues to provide an assistive listening system that meets its legal and technical standards, so in HLAA's view a well-planned Auracast deployment can meet those obligations.", "States that \"there is no such thing as an ADA-compliant assistive listening technology\": the ADA does not classify technologies, and the question is whether a venue's deployment meets its legal and technical standards.", "Notes that the 2010 ADA Standards name loop, infrared and FM only as examples, and that using a named technology does not by itself satisfy the ADA.", "Explains that hearing aids and cochlear implants use standard-quality streams (speech, low latency, low power). High-quality streams have more delay and are not interchangeable, so a product that broadcasts only high quality will not work with hearing devices. It asks venues to confirm that a standard-quality stream is configured.", "Advises people buying hearing devices now to ask for a model with both Auracast and a telecoil, and expects loop, FM, infrared and Wi-Fi systems to stay in use for some time.", "States that a phone or smartwatch is needed to select a stream, and that receivers with neckloops or headphones are needed for hearing devices without Auracast." ], "limitations": "A living web page (first published 3 December 2025; read as updated 28 September 2026) giving HLAA's interpretation, not legal advice or measurements. The webinar linked from the page was presented with a transmitter manufacturer (Ampetronic/Listen Technologies).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "finding-and-joining", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-and-auracast", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "rnid-2026-clear-signals", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-2026-clear-signals/", "title": "Clear Signals: improving transport accessibility for deaf people and people with hearing loss", "authors": "RNID", "publisher": "RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People)", "date": "2026-09-22", "kind": "Survey and field concept test", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (RNID survey and concept test; report funded by the Motability Foundation; Ampetronic, which installed the station's transmitters, announced in July 2025 that it commissioned RNID trials there, but the read sources do not establish whether those are the March 2026 concept test)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://rnid.org.uk/what-we-do/policy-and-influencing/clear-signals-improving-transport-accessibility/", "summary": "A UK survey of 1,762 deaf people and people with hearing loss about public transport, with a concept test of Auracast station announcements at Bristol Temple Meads in March 2026.", "findings": [ "The Technical Appendix (pp. 6-8) dates survey collection to 16 March-13 April 2026, through the RNID Research Panel, charity newsletter, social media, contacts and organisations, plus Survation and Norstat. Questions and answers were available in English and BSL. The analysed sample was 1,762, including 283 people using BSL in any capacity; 34 proxy responses and 117 responses from people who had not used public transport in two years were excluded.", "The Technical Appendix's improvements table (p. 44) asks respondents to select up to five changes that would most improve accessibility. Clearer announcements delivered directly to hearing devices were selected by 47% of all 1,762 respondents and 37% of the overlapping 283-person BSL subgroup. The item does not name a transmission technology.", "In the survey, 47% chose clearer audio announcements delivered directly to hearing devices as an improvement, the fourth most chosen. RNID notes that the technology is unfamiliar to most people, so demand is likely under-reported.", "Ten people (eight hearing aid users and two cochlear implant users, technical appendix page 10, Figure 3) were asked to behave as if catching a specified train, following live announcements, then joined focus groups. One already had Auracast in their hearing device, two used a loaned Android phone with a dongle receiver, and the rest used a loaned neckloop receiver with their telecoil setting.", "Participants found the announcements clearer and easier to understand with Auracast, and most could not understand them without it. They valued being able to move around the platform.", "Requested improvements: easier finding and joining of broadcasts, signage and website information, an audio alert before each announcement, and coverage tested so there are no dead spots. People whose hearing device had a telecoil-plus-microphone setting found it easier to balance the stream with surrounding sound.", "Its executive summary asks for announcements to be made accessible through technologies such as hearing loops, Auracast and, where possible, BSL translation.", "Quotes a respondent aged 65-74 in Greater London: \"Even when I twist to the loop setting, the noise level still gets to me\"; 72% said noise often or always makes information harder to access.", "The report's Acknowledgements credit the Motability Foundation with funding the research. Its Case study 1 (printed pages 62-63) and technical appendix, Auracast testing, describe the March 2026 concept test. Ampetronic's separately archived 30 July 2025 announcement says it commissioned RNID trials at the same station; neither read document explicitly identifies those trials as the March 2026 test.", "The linked Technical Appendix, printed pages 10–11 (https://rnid.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/clear-signals-technical-appendices-final.pdf), gives the ten-person sample and loan equipment: one had Auracast built in, two borrowed an Android phone and dongle receiver, and the remaining seven borrowed neckloop receivers. Each participant received setup support. The main report’s results and recommendations on printed pages 62–63 describe clearer announcements, easier joining, signs, website information and an announcement alert. The main report foreword and acknowledgments credit the Motability Foundation for funding.", "The Technical Appendix, Concept testing / Auracast testing and Summary of participants (printed pp. 10-11), gives the March 2026 date and the ten-person device breakdown. Ampetronic separately describes commissioning RNID trials in its 30 July 2025 installation announcement (https://www.ampetronic.com/ampetronic-completes-installation-of-auri-in-bristol-temple-meads-station/); neither passage establishes that this was the same test.", "The main report, printed pages 12–15, describes difficulty accessing safety and emergency information; its Safety and vulnerability section on printed page 56 says inaccessible announcements leave people unable to distinguish routine changes from serious incidents. The survey methodology on printed pages 10–11 gives 1,762 recent public transport users who are deaf or have hearing loss, including 283 BSL users. These survey findings are separate from the ten-person Auracast concept test.", "Case study 1 on printed pages 62–63 and the Technical Appendix on printed page 10 describe a task simulating catching a specified train, followed by discussion. They report no evacuation exercise, emergency-priority test or power-failure test; the clearer-announcement result is participant feedback rather than a measured intelligibility score." ], "limitations": "The Auracast part is a qualitative concept test with ten supported participants, with no coverage, signal or latency measurements, and the report does not name the transmitter system. Ampetronic said in a July 2025 press release that it installed the station's transmitters and commissioned RNID user trials there; the report credits its own funding to the Motability Foundation. The July 2025 statement does not identify the March 2026 concept test and does not establish its commissioning or funding.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "commissioning-tests", "finding-and-joining", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "telecoil-fitting", "loop-and-auracast", "signage-and-awareness", "transport", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops", "using-each-system", "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "iec-63087-2026", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-63087-2026/", "title": "IEC 63087:2026 Assistive listening devices and systems for active assisted living", "authors": "IEC TC 100", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "2026-09-18", "kind": "International standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission; the full text is sold, and only a preview is public)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/95094", "summary": "The new international standard setting requirements for assistive listening systems of all kinds, including 2.4 GHz broadcast systems for hearing aids.", "findings": [ "Edition 1.0, published 18 September 2026; its foreword says it cancels and replaces IEC 63087-1:2021 and takes a \"far more comprehensive approach\".", "Applies to all assistive listening systems used for communication, entertainment or education in public, private, domestic and public transport installations; it does not apply to hearing aids themselves.", "Its published table of contents includes a clause titled \"System compliance, testing and certification\" (clause 11), a normative assessment report (Annex E), a normative annex on latency and measuring delay (Annex H) and sections on 2.4 GHz audio broadcasting for hearing aids (A.6 and I.6).", "Its bibliography lists IEC 60118-17, on 2.4 GHz audio broadcasting for hearing aids, as under consideration.", "Its public table of contents lists a normative Annex E, the assessment report, with a section on ALS coverage (E.4) and a coverage assessment table (Table E.3).", "The archived 10-page IEC preview contains the contents, foreword, scope and normative references. It identifies clause 11 and Annex E but does not include their full text or numeric pass limits; the assessment-report comparison in the question is limited accordingly." ], "limitations": "Only the scope, foreword and table of contents are public, in the IEC preview; the requirements and any numeric limits are in the paid text and are not summarised here.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "signal-target", "which-technology", "commissioning-tests", "rf-fm-bands", "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "phonak-2026-eon-connectivity", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/phonak-2026-eon-connectivity/", "title": "Phonak EON: Connectivity excellence", "authors": "Roh M (Sonova)", "publisher": "Phonak Audiology Blog (Phonak Pro)", "date": "2026-09-17", "kind": "Manufacturer article", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sonova / Phonak)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://audiologyblog.phonakpro.com/phonak-eon-connectivity-excellence/", "summary": "Phonak's article for hearing care professionals on Bluetooth Classic, Roger and Auracast in the Audéo EON hearing aids.", "findings": [ "States that Audéo EON supports both the High Quality and the Standard Quality Auracast bitrates, which Phonak says broadens compatibility with transmitters.", "Where the phone has a native Auracast assistant, wearers can search for and join a broadcast there; the myPhonak and myPhonak Junior apps add a QR code scanner so that phones without a native assistant can still join.", "Wearers can adjust the balance between streamed and acoustic sound in the app, and clinicians can adjust Auracast settings in the fitting software.", "Reports that in Phonak's testing EON received an Auracast signal at up to 211 m, farther than three other hearing aids in the comparison. The test conditions are not published; the reference directs readers to a Sonova claims email address.", "The archived page metadata gives publication on 17 September 2026 and modification on 21 September 2026; it does not identify which passages changed." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer material for clinicians about one product family. The range comparison is unpublished, with no test conditions or competing models named, and the article gives no latency figures.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "device-compatibility", "finding-and-joining" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2026-outdoor", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2026-outdoor/", "title": "Auracast practical test outdoors", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz; English reprint by the Center for Hearing Access", "date": "2026-09-16", "kind": "Field test", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/Pro-Audito-Schweiz-Auracast-practical-test-outdoors.pdf", "summary": "A field test of Auracast, FM and 5G internet streaming at an outdoor event of about 2,000 people on Helvetiaplatz, Zurich, on 2 May 2026.", "findings": [ "The transmitter stood about 2 m high beside the left main loudspeaker, in an open area of about 30 x 20 m surrounded by buildings at some distance.", "With the authors' hearing aids and receivers, reception was reliable for virtually all receivers only up to about 5 m in front of the transmitter. At about 8 m, with the tester's own body between a chest-worn receiver and the transmitter, there was no reception.", "Outdoors the signal relied almost entirely on line of sight; one person in front could disrupt a belt- or chest-worn receiver, and without line of sight reception was \"practically always unacceptable\". The authors suspect the many phones and other Bluetooth devices in the crowd added packet loss.", "A functional test in the empty square did not reveal these limits; only the crowd did.", "Measured latency: Auracast 43 ms to a receiver and 54 ms to a hearing aid; FM 8 ms; 5G streaming about 360 ms. Sound from the loudspeakers took 25 to 100 ms to reach listeners, depending on position, so the authors also give each system's difference from that airborne sound: FM 17 to 92 ms, Auracast 18 to 57 ms (receiver) and 29 to 46 ms (hearing aid), and streaming 260 to 335 ms.", "The authors recommend a difference of at most 40 ms between airborne sound and the hearing system. At this event Auracast came closest to that value, FM sometimes exceeded it depending on position, and streaming fell far short; no system kept the two in step across the whole square, and the authors suggest offering channels with different delays for the front and back.", "The FM system, used because it was already in place, gave stable transmission with very low latency, but neckloop (telecoil) users heard interference from the magnetic fields of nearby tram overhead lines. The authors note that keeping existing FM systems can avoid buying Auracast receivers with neckloops, and that transformer stations, high-voltage lines and trains or trams can disrupt telecoil reception.", "The authors conclude that Auracast did not reach the often-promised 100 m and should for now be treated with caution, as a supplementary option outdoors. The 5G streaming gave uninterrupted reception across the venue but with high latency.", "Notes that manufacturers often advertise ranges of over 100 metres under ideal conditions.", "On PDF pp. 2-3, the empty-space check showed no difference between receivers worn on the belt, chest or ears (hearing aids and headphones); the report gives no date or measured distance for this check.", "PDF p. 4 identifies the internet service as Accessify over 5G. Under Limitations in the device connection, the authors report occasional interruptions on the Bluetooth link from phone to hearing aid, especially with the phone in a back pocket and the body blocking the path. This problem was not observed with in-ear headphones. The venue-wide internet reception statement does not establish uninterrupted delivery through every hearing aid.", "The table on p. 4 separates measured system latencies from differences to airborne sound. Its footnote derives the differences from 25-100 ms sound travel time at front/back positions. The Auracast entries (18-57 ms and 29-46 ms) are those endpoint differences, not bounds on the absolute offset at every intermediate position; at the front the stream is later, and at the back it is earlier. FM is earlier at both endpoints and Accessify later at both.", "On page 4, the streaming comparison reports interruptions between a smartphone and hearing aids over Bluetooth, especially with the phone in a back pocket blocking the path; this did not occur with the in-ear headphones tested. The uninterrupted coverage refers to the internet feed, not every complete listening path.", "The practical recommendation on page 5 asks organisers to test outdoor systems in advance and consult a specialist." ], "limitations": "One event, one transmitter position and the authors' own receivers; machine-translated from German.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "real-range", "which-technology", "interference", "outdoor-events", "rf-fm-bands", "transport", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-transmitter-howto", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-transmitter-howto/", "title": "How to build an Auracast transmitter: technical overview, version 3", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Market Development", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2026-09-16", "kind": "Industry guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2403_How_To_Auracast_Transmitter.pdf", "summary": "The SIG's design guide for transmitter makers, covering stream settings, Presentation Delay, airtime, encryption, volume and transmit power.", "findings": [ "Public transmitters must send at least one Standard Quality stream (16 or 24 kHz). For live use, where listeners also hear the room, the guide recommends the 24 kHz low-latency setting to limit echo.", "All Auracast receivers must support a Presentation Delay of 40 ms, and receivers built to the Hearing Access or Telephony and Media Audio profiles must support any value from 20 to 40 ms. Transmitters should not set less than 20 ms, but may set a flag asking receivers to play as early as they can; different pairs of receivers may then play at slightly different times.", "Transmitters for professional installation may let the installer adjust Presentation Delay to cope with latency in larger venues.", "One stream uses about 11 to 22% of the airtime at Standard Quality and 30 to 41% at High Quality, so a transmitter can carry only a few streams; the guide suggests defaulting to 24 kHz, or mono, in public locations. Settings with 7.5 ms frames should not be used for public broadcasts.", "Transmitters need no volume control: the specifications assume the level passes through unchanged and each listener sets the volume on their own receiver. The guide warns that turning a transmitter down can lead to painfully loud audio when a listener switches to another stream.", "Transmit power should be the lowest that gives reliable coverage of the intended area. Confidential content should be encrypted because the signal passes through walls.", "With the recommended 30 ms advertising interval, most scanning devices should find a transmitter within 10 seconds. A built-in test sound is suggested to help check an installation.", "Appendix A, Tables 8.1-8.2, calculates 10.6-21.7% airtime per Standard Quality BIS and 29.7-40.7% per High Quality BIS, using 10 ms frames on the 2M PHY and excluding advertising overhead (about 0.6% per BIG). These are per-BIS figures, not a venue-wide channel limit.", "Appendix B says Program_Info and Language metadata describe subgroups, but assistants and receivers may ignore optional metadata. The Assisted Listening Stream marker identifies processing intended to improve intelligibility; the guide cautions that hearing aids already apply personalised processing and may prefer another stream.", "Appendix A, pages 30-32, shows higher airtime with more retransmissions and examples of stereo carried by two BISes and alternative programmes by additional BISes. The guide also warns that all BISes within one BIG receive the same airtime allocation, sized for the largest packet, so combining codec settings can use more airtime than placing them in separate BIGs." ], "limitations": "Design guidance for manufacturers. The airtime figures are the SIG's calculations for one stream on the 2M PHY, not measurements. The cover gives 16 September 2026 and the version history 14 September 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "real-range", "audio-level", "which-technology", "large-venues", "interference", "privacy", "courts-and-chambers", "healthcare-settings", "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "asa-2026-school-acoustics", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/asa-2026-school-acoustics/", "title": "Now Published: ASA/ANSI S12.60-2026/Part 1 Sets Updated Acoustical Criteria for Permanent Schools", "authors": "Acoustical Society of America", "publisher": "ASA Standards", "date": "2026-09-16", "kind": "Standards publication announcement", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Acoustical Society of America)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://asastandards.org/2026/09/now-published-asa-ansi-s12-60-2026-part-1-sets-updated-acoustical-criteria-for-permanent-schools/", "summary": "ASA announces the 2026 revision of its permanent-school acoustics standard.", "findings": [ "States that ANSI approved the revision on 31 August 2026 and that it replaces the 2010 Part 1 edition reaffirmed in 2024.", "Describes minimum acoustical design criteria for classrooms and other permanent-school learning spaces, with Annex A on verification of noise levels and Annex B on additional parameters affecting speech intelligibility." ], "limitations": "Announcement only; the full 2026 standard was not read and no numeric limits are inferred. Publication date comes from the page’s article metadata. Does not establish adoption into local building rules.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-location-brand-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-location-brand-guide/", "title": "Public Location Brand Guide for Auracast Trademarks", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2026-09-15", "kind": "Program terms", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark; location trademark programme terms)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/2025_Public-Location-Brand-Guide-for-Auracast-Trademarks.zip", "summary": "The SIG's rules for venues that use the Auracast name and logos to promote a broadcast; the guide is a PDF inside the brand download linked from the SIG's public-locations page.", "findings": [ "A venue may use the Auracast marks only under licence, and only if it offers a Standard Quality stream for all audio content it provides by Auracast and has registered the location with the SIG.", "The location graphic is for registered locations only, for use at the premises or on the venue's website, and not on products.", "Registered locations may also display an assistive listening graphic that places the Auracast mark below the international symbol for hearing-loss access.", "On first use, the word mark must be followed by a generic term such as \"broadcast audio\"." ], "limitations": "Trademark licence terms, not a technical or accessibility standard; nothing in it tests coverage or audio quality.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "signage-and-awareness", "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "apple-2026-hearing-aid-feature", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/apple-2026-hearing-aid-feature/", "title": "Use the Hearing Aid feature on your AirPods Pro 2 or AirPods Pro 3", "authors": "Apple", "publisher": "Apple Support", "date": "2026-09-14", "kind": "Manufacturer support guidance", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Apple, maker of AirPods and the Hearing Aid feature)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/120992", "summary": "Apple distinguishes amplification of surrounding sound from adjustments to media and calls, with model, software and regional conditions.", "findings": [ "Names AirPods Pro 2 and Pro 3, current firmware and iPhone or iPad software, and availability in supported countries or regions. Hearing Aid is intended for adults with perceived mild to moderate hearing loss.", "Hearing Aid amplifies surrounding sound in Transparency mode. Media Assist applies adjustments based on hearing-test results to music, videos and calls, across noise-control modes.", "Hearing Aid settings remain on the earbuds and work without the paired phone nearby. Apple describes Conversation Boost as best for a person speaking directly in front of the listener." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer instructions, not an independent outcome study. The page documents neither Auracast reception nor tests with venue Wi-Fi apps; hearing features alone do not establish those capabilities.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "cha-system-setup", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-system-setup/", "title": "Set-up of Assistive Listening Systems", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "2026-09-12", "kind": "Advocacy setup guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, a hearing-access advocacy organisation)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/setup/", "summary": "Guidance on feeding all programme sources to assistive listening and monitoring the received sound during operation.", "findings": [ "Asks that microphones, video, online meeting and laptop audio sources feed the assistive listening system through the sound mixer.", "Calls for continuous sound checks by audio staff using a borrowed receiver and headphones.", "Warns that a microphone at the back of the room or sound desk captures room noise and reverberation and is unsuitable as the assistive listening source." ], "limitations": "Guidance without measurements. The date is the page metadata’s last modification, 12 September 2026; metadata gives initial publication as 8 September 2025. The record uses the readable page text; embedded setup diagrams were not analysed. Its broad assertion that sound judged good by staff will benefit a person with hearing loss is not a substitute for listener feedback or measurements.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "venue-self-checks", "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "cha-2026-instruments", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-2026-instruments/", "title": "\"Worldwide Access\" hearing instruments list", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access (The John G. Shedd Institute)", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "2026-09-11", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts; it states that it accepts no donations from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/Worldwide-Access-Hearing-Instruments-List.pdf", "summary": "Lists hearing aids and implant processors with built-in telecoils, and those that also have built-in Auracast.", "findings": [ "Distinguishes \"Auracast Ready\" (hardware chip present, cannot connect yet) from \"Auracast Enabled\" (hardware and firmware, can connect now). A few listed models are marked Auracast Ready.", "States that fewer than 2% of facilities have installed Auracast, and that Auracast is forecast to become the dominant technology over the next decade.", "Says it is too soon to say whether installations can meet a given country's disability laws, partly because IEC 60118-17 is not expected until late 2027, and warns that without standards and reputable third-party proof-of-concept testing, site and user equipment may be incompatible.", "Telecoil users can reach Auracast systems through a neckloop or ear hooks.", "Page 2 says the lists require a built-in telecoil and exclude instruments whose telecoil is in an accessory. Its dual-connectivity category covers both ready and enabled devices; an entry without an individual status label does not distinguish the two.", "Page 3's dual-connectivity hearing-aid list includes AGX-O B500/400/300/200 RITE, Beltone Serene SERx64-DRW, Bernafon Encanta MiniRITE and miniBTE, GN Danalogic Extend, and Jabra Enhance Pro RIE 13. The Beltone code contains a lowercase x.", "Page 3 also lists Oticon Intent miniRITE R, Reveal and Verit, and HearLink 9050 under the brand spelling Phillips. A separate Oticon entry gives miniRITE T, miniBTE T 85 and BTE T 105 without a family name. Reveal and Verit are described as rechargeable and disposable-battery lines respectively, without enumerated styles.", "The ReSound entries on page 3 are rechargeable ENZO IA without a style code, Nexia RIE 62 and BTE 77, and Savi, Sensia and Vivia in RIE 62 style.", "Page 3 explicitly marks Signia Pure Charge&Go TIX RITE (introduced 2023) and Pure C&G MaX (2026), Widex Allure RIC R D (2025) and its separately named 2026 successor, and Cochlear N8 (late 2022) as Auracast ready. All appear in the built-in telecoil and Auracast list.", "Page 3 includes Starkey Edge RIC RT, CROS and ITE R, and Omega RIC RT and ITE in its built-in telecoil and Auracast list. Promotional suffixes are omitted here. Inclusion of CROS does not separately explain that component's reception path.", "The built-in-telecoil section on page 3 includes Audicus Omni 2, Audigy's AGX-E and AGX-O-F in miniRITE R style, and Miracle-Ear CONNECT BTE SP 13 EV. It lists Oticon More in miniRITE R, miniRITE T, miniBTE R and miniBTE T styles, and OPN Play and OPN S in miniRITE R, miniRITE T and BTE PP styles. Oticon Own custom ITC, HS and FS have telecoil as an option.", "Page 4 continues with Oticon Play PX, Real and Zircon, each in miniRITE R, miniRITE T, miniBTE R and miniBTE T styles; Play SI miniBTE R; Ruby miniRITE R, miniRITE T, BTE and BTE PP; and Xceed and Xceed Play, each in BTE SP and BTE UP styles. These entries establish built-in telecoil listing, not an Auracast status.", "Page 4 lists Philips HearLink 9040 with telecoil included and HearLink ITC, ITE HS and ITE FS with telecoil optional. It does not assign a generation number to the custom styles.", "Page 4's Phonak telecoil entries are Naida L-SP and L-UP, Audéo L-RT and an unsuffixed L, Audéo Marvel M-RT, and Audéo Paradise P-RT. Other entries include Rexton Reach R-Li T, ReSound ENZO Q and Ligo, and Horizon IX, RIC 7AX and Pure TIX grouped under Signia/TruHearing. The list does not resolve possible aliases or overlap between entries.", "Page 4 lists Starkey S Series RIC, Genesis RIC RT and Evolve RT BTE/RIC, retaining the source's Evolve spelling while omitting promotional suffixes here. It also lists TruHearing TH 7 RIC LI T.", "Page 4's Unitron telecoil entries are Insera B-312 NW O and B-10 NW O, Max UP, Moxi Jump RT, Moxi V-RT, Stride V-M, Stride V-SP, Stride V-UP and Stride B-UP. Its cochlear-processor entries are an unspecified Advanced Bionics entry, Cochlear N7 and MED-EL Sonnet 2.", "Page 5's final revision line ends with 11 September 2026, the date used for this record." ], "limitations": "A curated list that changes often; inclusion requires a built-in telecoil. It does not count how many models are Ready rather than Enabled.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "future-proofing", "listener-preference", "loop-and-auracast", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2026-neckloops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2026-neckloops/", "title": "Which inductive neck loops are suitable for Auracast/FM/IR receivers?", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz; English reprint by the Center for Hearing Access", "date": "2026-09-08", "kind": "Bench test", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/Pro-Audito-Schweiz-Which-inductive-neck-loops-are-suitable-for-AuracastFMIR-receivers.pdf", "summary": "Frequency response and field strength of six neckloops measured on a dummy head per IEC 62489-1.", "findings": [ "Many available neckloops lose level at high frequencies, which matter most for speech intelligibility (2 to 4 kHz), and so are unsuitable for telecoil users.", "Ranked first: Geemarc iLoop+ (active, with its own amplifier; the flattest high-frequency response). Second: Listen LA-438 (less high-frequency roll-off than other passive models; 0 dB re 400 mA/m at -12.7 dBu input). Third: Beyerdynamic/Televic IL 200 and Sennheiser EZT-3012, both with significant high-frequency loss.", "Not recommended: Monacor NL-90 (very strong treble loss) and Williams AV NKL-001S (very uneven, source-dependent response).", "Opens by saying no neckloop reaches the quality of \"a perfectly installed, permanently installed hearing system\".", "Gives the input each neckloop needed for the reference field (0 dB re 400 mA/m): IL 200 -6.4 dBu, EZT-3012 +0.3 dBu.", "Reports that the LA-438's 3-6 ohm impedance can distort at maximum volume on weak headphone outputs, so it is only reliable with professional receivers; that the iLoop+ works from any headphone output (phone, PC, tablet) and needs regular charging; and that with the Williams NKL-001S, whose impedance rises with frequency, no headphone output gave an acceptable result.", "Calls the iLoop+ the best choice for mobile devices without professional transmitter outputs, and the IL 200 and EZT-3012 the second-best choice for professional Auracast, FM or infrared receivers, provided the receiver's output drives them with a sufficient signal level.", "The English reprint describes the iLoop+ as usable with smartphone, PC and tablet headphone outputs (page 2), reports trying headphone outputs with the Williams model (page 5), and specifies dummy-head measurements (page 6). It does not identify particular phones or headphone outputs or give a separate result set for phone-driven neckloops.", "The page 6 graph gives magnetic-field level in dB relative to each curve's level at 1 kHz. It is a relative frequency-response plot, separate from the absolute 400 mA/m sensitivity results on pages 3-4.", "Page 2 describes reduced low-frequency response for the iLoop+ and identifies its integrated amplifier and battery. Page 3 specifies that the LA-438's reported 3-6 ohm impedance is at 1 kHz." ], "limitations": "One measurement method on a dummy head; non-linear headphone outputs may give a different response in practice. Six models are described, but project funding and the number of units tested per model are not stated. Machine-translated from German.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "wifi-networks", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "loop-and-auracast", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops", "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "imove-2026-auracast-transport", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/imove-2026-auracast-transport/", "title": "Accelerating the adoption of Auracast: everyone should hear what matters (final report, iMOVE project 6-057 IEP)", "authors": "La Trobe University, NEC Australia and Get Skilled Access", "publisher": "iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre", "date": "2026-09-04", "kind": "Field trial (research report)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (undertaken by La Trobe University, NEC Australia and Get Skilled Access; funded by the Australian Government through the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre's Impact Extension Program)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://imoveaustralia.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Accelerating-the-adoption-of-Auracast-everyone-should-hear-what-matters-Final-report.pdf", "summary": "The final report of an Australian project that trialled Auracast passenger announcements at Melbourne Airport, on Melbourne buses and at a Canberra light rail and bus interchange, and asked how Auracast and hearing loops should work together during a transition.", "findings": [ "Section 3 (page 11) reports 19 structured user-testing sessions at three locations, including people who use hearing aids or cochlear implants and people who are blind, have low vision or are neurodivergent; it does not give a total number of participants. The sites are Melbourne Airport Terminal 4, CDC Melbourne bus services from Highpoint Shopping Centre in Maribyrnong, and the Dickson light rail and bus interchange in Canberra.", "Participants described announcements through Auracast as clearer, with less distortion, interference and listening effort than they had experienced with hearing loops, and valued being able to move around while staying connected.", "Recommends a staged rollout in bounded settings such as buses, carriages, waiting rooms and station zones, and that Auracast be \"deployed alongside, not instead of, existing hearing loop systems\" to keep access for telecoil users during the transition.", "States that Auracast can give broader coverage and lower-cost, less invasive deployment than loops, and that, like a loop, it is not a \"set and forget\" technology.", "Lists device compatibility, finding and joining broadcasts, and connection steps as areas still to mature, and recommends testing a broad range of receivers, clear channel names, and signage or QR codes that explain what each broadcast carries and what to do if it is unavailable.", "Its executive summary says benefits were observed among hearing aid users and also among blind and low-vision passengers and neurodivergent participants.", "Reports that some participants who had given up on the hearing loop said they would reconsider assistive hearing technology (section 3.1.1).", "The final report cover identifies Australian Government funding through iMOVE IEP. Section 3 (page 11) names La Trobe University, NEC Australia and Get Skilled Access as delivering the trials and reports 19 structured sessions at three locations; this final report does not give a total number of individual participants." ], "limitations": "A qualitative trial: the companion user experience report lists 14 participants, and no loop was tested side by side, so comparisons with loops rest on participants' past experience. The final report gives no measured coverage, latency or cost figures (a separate technical report was not read). It identifies NEC Australia among the organisations delivering the project, without allocating the pilot and integration work to individual organisations. No publication date is printed; the record date comes from the PDF creation metadata (4 September 2026), not a stated trial date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "transport", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "arora-2026-personal-hearing-amplifiers", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/arora-2026-personal-hearing-amplifiers/", "title": "Barriers and facilitators in using personal hearing amplifiers from the perspective of healthcare providers", "authors": "Arora MA, Xu J, Kokorelias KM, Koerber R, Krishnapillai H, Sinha SK", "publisher": "Canadian Geriatrics Journal 29(3):173-179", "date": "2026-09-02", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (qualitative interviews)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Sinai Health and University Health Network, Toronto, and the University of Toronto; funded by the Healthy Ageing and Geriatrics Program Research Fund and Summer Scholars Research Program of Sinai Health and University Health Network and a medical-student summer research programme; the authors declare no conflicts of interest)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://cgjonline.ca/index.php/cgj/article/view/932", "summary": "Interviews with 33 staff and volunteers at a Toronto teaching hospital about why the personal hearing amplifiers its units hold for older patients go unused.", "findings": [ "Between July and August 2023 the authors interviewed 33 geriatricians, nurses, other allied health professionals and volunteers from units at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, that had received Pocketalker amplifiers in 2021, and analysed the interviews thematically; 13 participants checked the preliminary findings.", "Participants saw the amplifiers as valuable but underused. They described easier conversations, among them one about a patient's capacity to refuse care. Amplifiers got used when one was already at the bedside and working; one nurse said that without one already there, the nurse had never tried to start using one.", "Barriers included devices kept out of sight (one in a cupboard reached with a stool), time spent searching other units, devices taken away and not returned, and geriatricians paying for their own; no one was clearly responsible for batteries, headphones, repairs or replacement.", "Participants described no uniform hospital-wide system for retrieving, cleaning, storing and returning the devices, and one geriatrician asked whether there are cleaning procedures staff need to know about. A social worker described putting on protective equipment to see a patient in isolation before finding that the patient could not hear.", "The authors suggest strategic placement, standard protocols, designated roles, training, and recording hearing loss and device use in the medical record. In their introduction they write, citing earlier studies, that hearing loss affects at least two-thirds of hospitalised older adults and that personal hearing amplifiers consistently improved patient-provider communication." ], "limitations": "One hospital; most participants were nurses, volunteers may have been those most interested in the devices, no audiologists or speech-language pathologists took part, and no patients were interviewed. Data were collected after the COVID-19 pandemic, when, the authors note, infection control procedures may have shaped views. The study reports perceptions, not measured use or outcomes.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "graf-2026", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/graf-2026/", "title": "Bluetooth Auracast in theaters and event venues", "authors": "Graf B (Pro Audito Schweiz)", "publisher": "Proscenium no. 3, pp. 10-11, Swiss Association of Technical Stage and Event Industry; English reprint by the Center for Hearing Access", "date": "2026-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Trade article by a standards-committee expert", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/Proscenium-Technical-article-Bluetooth-Auracast-in-theaters-and-event-venues-1.pdf", "summary": "Practical guidance for Auracast in theatres: range, placement, power, PIN codes, audio level, latency, loan receivers and communication.", "findings": [ "Manufacturers often state theoretical ranges of up to 100 m, but real range is about 30 m. In a fully occupied room with heavy Wi-Fi, the distance for interference-free reception can be considerably shorter than in an empty room.", "Mount the transmitter high, above the audience, on walls or on the ceiling; ideally the farthest seat should be no more than 20 to 30 m away.", "Most professional and many low-cost transmitters run at 10 mW (10 dBm), which the article calls the maximum permissible in Europe. Theatres should use maximum power; reducing power to limit range is not recommended because it puts less sensitive receivers at risk when the venue is full.", "A PIN code (4 to 16 digits) is needed only where discretion is required and reception outside the venue is unwanted. If one is used it should be new for each event and clearly displayed, for example at the entrance; where possible a PIN should be avoided, to make handling simpler for technicians and the audience.", "Manufacturers, the SIG and standards committees do not yet agree on a reference level: the SIG recommends -35 dBFS; TV content is often -27 to -23 dBFS and music -16 to -14 dBFS. The article recommends about -25 dBFS for theatres, with a light compressor (about 2:1) and a limiter as a possibly better approach than automatic gain control.", "With a Dante or AES67 feed, the console's digital output level in dBFS equals the stream level, provided the transmitter adds no gain.", "About 40 ms is considered the maximum acceptable difference between room sound and the stream. This is hard to meet near the stage: transmitter-to-receiver delay is at best under 40 ms, but total delay through headphones and hearing aids is often about 70 ms. Picture-to-stream difference should ideally not exceed 45 ms.", "Switzerland's SIA 500 currently gives a guideline of 10 receivers or 5 to 10% of the audience; this is now considered too high and is likely to fall to 4 receivers in the coming revision. Loan receivers must be free." ], "limitations": "Expert guidance based on Swiss practice; no measurement data or method is reported. EN 300 328 allows up to 20 dBm e.i.r.p.; 10 dBm is the level above which its adaptivity or airtime limits apply. Machine-translated from German.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "real-range", "audio-level", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "large-venues", "interference", "outdoor-events", "privacy", "wifi-latency", "courts-and-chambers", "theatres-and-cinemas", "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2026-en-301-549-v4", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2026-en-301-549-v4/", "title": "EN 301 549 V4.1.1 (2026-09): accessibility requirements for ICT products and services", "authors": "ETSI, CEN and CENELEC", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2026-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Harmonised European standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, CEN and CENELEC, the European standards organisations)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301500_301599/301549/04.01.01_60/en_301549v040101p.pdf", "summary": "The new edition of the European ICT accessibility standard, written as a means of meeting the European Accessibility Act, including how kiosks, phones and other ICT should work with hearing technologies.", "findings": [ "Adopted on 24 August 2026; national standards bodies must announce it by 30 November 2026 and publish it by 31 May 2027, and conflicting national standards are withdrawn by 31 May 2028. It gives a presumption of conformity with the European Accessibility Act once cited in the Official Journal.", "Clause 4.2.5 requires ICT with auditory modes to provide enhanced audio features; a note says letting people connect assistive listening devices, for example through headphone jacks, Bluetooth, USB or WLAN, can contribute.", "Wired handsets and phones held to the ear must provide magnetic (telecoil) coupling to hearing technologies; a note says kiosks and other ticket and information machines sometimes have such handsets.", "Its mapping to the European Accessibility Act links the requirement that self-service terminals be compatible with \"hearing aids, telecoils, cochlear implants and assistive listening devices\" to clauses 4.2, 5.1, 8.2 and 11.5.2.", "Does not mention LE Audio or Auracast.", "The cover and document history identify September 2026 as the publication month. Clause 8.2.2.1 requires fixed-line communication devices or wired handsets with speech output typically held to the ear to provide magnetic coupling; marking that compatibility is required where the ICT is designed for public use." ], "limitations": "Covers ICT products and services such as kiosks, terminals and phones, not assistive listening systems in rooms. Whether it has been cited in the Official Journal was not checked.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "service-counters" ] }, { "id": "phso-nhs-england-review-loop", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/phso-nhs-england-review-loop/", "title": "Reasonable adjustments not put in place for dyslexia", "authors": "Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman", "publisher": "ombudsman.org.uk", "date": "2026-09-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Article (ombudsman case summary)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Government (public ombudsman’s account of an NHS England complaint)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/publications/spotlight-accessible-communication-your-stories-your-rights/reasonable-adjustments-not-put-place-dyslexia", "summary": "An NHS England review-meeting complaint included a hearing loop that could not be used in the booked room. The ombudsman recommended an apology, £500 and service improvements for the combined adjustment failures.", "findings": [ "The page is part of a report published and updated on 1 September 2026. It describes requests starting in May 2019 for adjustments at an independent review panel meeting about continuing healthcare funding; it does not give the decision date.", "NHS England arranged a hearing loop for a relative supporting the complainant, but the room booked could not use the equipment. The ombudsman says this prevented the complainant from getting the needed support.", "The ombudsman found that NHS England did not provide all requested adjustments, did not properly consider feasibility or alternatives, and lacked evidence that those involved in the meeting had been told about the adjustments.", "The account also records positive steps: the meeting was made longer and its chair followed the requested discussion order. Other preparation and report-format adjustments were missed.", "The ombudsman recommended acknowledgement, an apology, £500 and an explanation of learning and service improvements. It reports subsequent policy and procedure changes for recording and fulfilling adjustment requests." ], "limitations": "An anonymised case summary, not the full investigation or a court ruling. Publication on 1 September 2026 is not the decision date, which is unstated. The £500 recommendation covers multiple failures and cannot be assigned solely to the loop. The room/equipment incompatibility is not technically explained.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "complaints-and-cases" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2026-device-list", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2026-device-list/", "title": "Hearing aids and implants with Auracast function (status 31 August 2026)", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz (in German)", "date": "2026-08-31", "kind": "Device list", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/wp-content/uploads/Hoersysteme_mit_Auracast_260831.pdf", "summary": "A one-page table of 27 hearing aid, cochlear implant and bone-conduction product lines from six manufacturer groups, giving each line's Auracast status and telecoil availability.", "findings": [ "Of 27 entries, 20 are listed as Auracast capable and 7 as \"ready\", including all three cochlear implant processors listed (Cochlear Nucleus Nexa, Nucleus 8 and Kanso 3). For two of the ready lines an update is expected in 2027.", "The two bone-conduction implants listed, Cochlear Baha 7 and Osia 3, are marked Auracast capable.", "Telecoil availability varies: three capable or ready lines have no telecoil, several have one only in some models or styles, and the two bone-conduction implants listed have telecoil access only with an accessory.", "At least four capable lines are listed with a telecoil, and several ready lines also have one.", "Lists Nucleus Nexa, Nucleus 8 and Kanso 3 each with a telecoil (\"Telefonspule: Ja\").", "In the one-page table's Phonak rows, EON series is capable and Infinio series is ready, with an update expected in 2027. Both rows say no telecoil; the series' individual styles are not enumerated.", "The Oticon rows mark Intent series, Zeal and Reveal capable; Intent and Reveal have telecoil yes, while Zeal has telecoil no. Philips Hearing Solutions HearLink 9050 and Bernafon Encanta are marked capable with telecoil yes. These are line-level assertions without a style breakdown.", "Signia IX is ready for some models, with telecoils in models bearing T in the name. Signia MaX is ready with a March 2027 update expected and telecoil yes. Widex Allure series is ready with telecoil yes.", "ReSound Nexia, Sensia, Vivia, Savi and Enzo IA, and Beltone Serene, Envision, Commence and Illuminate are marked capable, with telecoil availability depending on model. Jabra Enhance is marked capable for some models, also with telecoil depending on model.", "The Starkey Omega and Edge rows are marked capable, with telecoil only in RIC RT or through an accessory. Promotional suffixes are omitted here. The table does not enumerate other styles.", "Baha 7 and Osia 3 are categorized as bone-conduction implants, with telecoil access through an accessory. The table gives no accessory model or firmware version. Its Nucleus Nexa cochlear-implant entry gives no processor-style breakdown." ], "limitations": "A status list, not a performance test. It states that the details are given without warranty, it does not define \"ready\", and status changes with firmware updates.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "future-proofing", "listener-reach", "loop-and-auracast", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "dft-2026-bus-nap-guidance", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dft-2026-bus-nap-guidance/", "title": "Creating and managing a bus network accessibility plan", "authors": "Department for Transport", "publisher": "GOV.UK", "date": "2026-08-28", "kind": "Regulatory guidance (for local transport authorities in England)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (UK Department for Transport)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/creating-and-managing-a-bus-network-accessibility-plan-bus-nap/creating-and-managing-a-bus-network-accessibility-plan", "summary": "Guidance for local transport authorities in England on the bus network accessibility plans required by the Bus Services Act 2025, with example commitments that include Auracast on buses.", "findings": [ "States that every local transport authority in England must publish an initial bus network accessibility plan by 1 April 2027 and review it at least every three years.", "Lists, among non-exhaustive example commitments that authorities may choose, having Auracast installed on all vehicles on the network by a set date.", "Notes that hearing aids are increasingly fitted with Auracast and that it \"could provide a more reliable and personalisable experience for passengers who are deaf or hard of hearing than induction loops do\"." ], "limitations": "Example commitments, which the guidance calls not prescriptive. It gives no evidence for the comparison with induction loops and does not say whether existing loops on buses should be kept. England and buses only.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "transport" ] }, { "id": "wsa-2026-signia-max", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/wsa-2026-signia-max/", "title": "Signia Introduces MaX, Powered by Acoustic Intelligence: World's First AI Hearing Aid Platform with 4 DNNs", "authors": "WS Audiology", "publisher": "WS Audiology press release", "date": "2026-08-24", "kind": "Press release", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Manufacturer (WS Audiology / Signia)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.wsa.com/press-release/signia-introduces-max-powered-by-acoustic-intelligence-worlds-first-ai-hearing-aid-platform-with-4-dnns/", "summary": "WS Audiology's launch release for the Signia MaX platform and its first model, the Pure C&G MaX.", "findings": [ "Lists Bluetooth Classic, LE Audio, telecoil and Auracast connectivity for the Pure C&G MaX.", "A footnote describes the aids as \"Ready\" for Auracast, with full Auracast functionality to be enabled by a firmware update through the Signia One app by March 2027.", "Gives availability from 24 August 2026 in markets including the US, Germany and the Nordic countries, with most other markets later in 2026." ], "limitations": "A press release. The Auracast function is a promised update, not a demonstrated feature, and the release does not describe how wearers will join broadcasts.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "future-proofing" ] }, { "id": "everyman-playhouse-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/everyman-playhouse-auracast/", "title": "New Assistive Listening at our theatres", "authors": "Liverpool Everyman & Playhouse Theatres", "publisher": "Liverpool Everyman & Playhouse Theatres", "date": "2026-08-19", "kind": "Venue access guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (the theatre operator describes its own access service; funding for the installation is not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://everymanplayhouse.com/new-assistive-listening-at-our-theatres/", "summary": "The operator describes performance audio and selectable audio description at selected performances.", "findings": [ "The theatre says it has introduced Auri and offers reception on compatible personal devices or borrowed receivers, with headphones or an induction neckband.", "At selected audio-described performances, listeners can select the audio-description stream where available. Audience Experience staff help connect devices or provide a receiver.", "The operator recommends arriving early for setup help and telling the box office when audio description is needed." ], "limitations": "Operational guidance from the venue, not a measured trial. No listener sample, equipment configuration, stream labels, simultaneous-channel count or compatibility test results are given.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "listen-2026-vue-auri", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2026-vue-auri/", "title": "Next-Gen Auracast Assistive Listening Technology Comes to Vue Cinemas Through Auri", "authors": "Listen Technologies; Ampetronic", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (news release)", "date": "2026-08-17", "kind": "Manufacturer press release", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies and Ampetronic, which make the Auri system installed; the release quotes Vue's general manager for the UK and Ireland and an Ampetronic | Listen Technologies sales manager)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/news/next-gen-auracast-assistive-listening-technology-comes-to-vue-cinemas-through-auri/", "summary": "The makers of an Auracast assistive listening system announce its installation in 20 cinemas of the UK's largest cinema operator.", "findings": [ "States that Auri has been rolled out across 20 Vue cinemas in the UK and Ireland, which together account for more than 28% of admissions across the chain.", "Says patrons with Auracast-enabled hearing aids, cochlear implants, headphones or earbuds can select a broadcast and receive the audio directly, and that dedicated receivers, used with connected headphones or earbuds, are available for those without such devices or who prefer to borrow one.", "Says the system can also deliver audio description, and may suit neurodivergent patrons who prefer a quieter cinema experience.", "States that installation needs no retrofitting or renovation downtime, that Auri can sit alongside existing assistive listening systems, and that the operator manages transmitters and receivers across the chain with Windows software.", "Says Vue chose the system for its audio quality, low latency, reliability and ease of use, and quotes the makers calling it one of the first large-scale Auracast deployments in cinemas." ], "limitations": "A maker's announcement of its own product's sale, with no measurements, latency figures, user numbers or costs. It does not say which assistive listening systems the 20 cinemas had before, whether they remain, or whether receivers are offered with neckloops.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "atg-2026-mobileconnect", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/atg-2026-mobileconnect/", "title": "Hearing Assistance: Mobile Connect System", "authors": "ATG (ATG Tickets help centre)", "publisher": "ATG Tickets - United Kingdom", "date": "2026-08-06", "kind": "Venue guidance (operator's help article)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (ATG, a theatre group, writing about the system in its own UK theatres; the system is Sennheiser's MobileConnect)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://help.atgtickets.com/hc/en-gb/articles/4594278746002-Hearing-Assistance-Mobile-Connect-System", "summary": "A theatre group's help article on the Wi-Fi assisted listening system in all its UK venues: what to bring, how to connect and how to prepare the phone.", "findings": [ "States that all ATG UK venues offer a Wi-Fi assisted listening system, Sennheiser MobileConnect, which carries a live feed of the performance, and audio description at described performances, to the listener's own phone or tablet, heard through headphones or digital hearing aids anywhere in the auditorium.", "Asks theatregoers to bring a fully charged device with the latest version of the app and their own headphones, warns that the battery \"could be fully depleted by the end of the show\", and suggests bringing a battery bank.", "Tells listeners to join the system's own Wi-Fi network on arrival (a differently named network at one theatre) and to switch mobile data off, set the phone to silent and use airplane mode, in which the system still works." ], "limitations": "A venue's instructions, with no figures on use, battery drain or reliability. The date is the article's last edit, from the help centre's own data; the article was first created on 10 March 2022. The help centre refused automated page requests, so the text was read through the help centre's public article feed, which serves the same article.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "atg-2026-mobileconnect-apple-wifi", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/atg-2026-mobileconnect-apple-wifi/", "title": "How to join venue Wi-Fi for Mobile Connect on an Apple device", "authors": "ATG (ATG Tickets help centre)", "publisher": "ATG Tickets - United Kingdom", "date": "2026-08-06", "kind": "Venue guidance (operator's help article)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (ATG, a theatre group, writing about the system in its own UK theatres; the system is Sennheiser's MobileConnect)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://help.atgtickets.com/hc/en-gb/articles/37340098328466-How-to-join-venue-Wi-Fi-for-Mobile-Connect-on-an-Apple-device", "summary": "A theatre group's step-by-step help article on joining its venues' Wi-Fi network on an iPhone or iPad before using the MobileConnect app.", "findings": [ "Tells listeners to choose the venue network, named MobileConnect or HearingAssistance, in the phone's Wi-Fi settings.", "Says that once the phone starts connecting, it loads a web page asking the listener to agree to the terms and conditions, and finishes connecting only after they are accepted.", "Points listeners who still cannot connect to Apple's general Wi-Fi troubleshooting page and to the venue's main MobileConnect article." ], "limitations": "Instructions for Apple devices only, with no figures on how often joining fails. The date is the article's last edit, from the help centre's own data; the article was first created on 18 July 2026. The help centre refused automated page requests, so the text was read through the help centre's public article feed, which serves the same article.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "savant-auracast-explorer", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/savant-auracast-explorer/", "title": "AuraCast Explorer: Google Play developer listing", "authors": "Savant Labs", "publisher": "Google Play (developer listing by Savant Labs)", "date": "2026-08-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Manufacturer app listing", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Savant Labs, developer of AuraCast Explorer)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.savantlabs.auracastexplorer&hl=en", "summary": "The app developer describes broadcast discovery and signal details, without a published calibration method or measurement tolerance.", "findings": [ "The developer lists scanning for nearby Auracast broadcasts and displaying signal strength, distance, codec and encryption status, along with joining broadcasts and saving favourites.", "The listing includes a demonstration mode that works without Bluetooth hardware. Demonstration output therefore cannot establish that a venue transmission is present.", "The listing displays an update date of 1 August 2026. It supplies no signal-strength accuracy, distance-error bound, calibration procedure or validation against an audio analyser." ], "limitations": "Developer feature claims, not independently tested performance. The app was not installed or tested. User reviews and ratings were not used as evidence of accuracy or device compatibility; the listing does not establish a calibrated venue acceptance test.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "bruce-2026", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bruce-2026/", "title": "Evaluation of the first generation of Auracast-compatible transmitters, hearing aids and earbuds", "authors": "Bruce I, Clarke S, Armstrong S, Bosnyak D", "publisher": "IHCON 2026 (McMaster University; SoundsGood Labs)", "date": "2026-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Conference abstract", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (McMaster University with SoundsGood Labs, which the synopsis does not describe; no funding statement in the synopsis)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/IHCON-Synopsis-Bruce-Evaluation-of-the-first-generation-of-Auracast-compatible-transmitters-hearing-aids-and-Earbuds-August-2026.pdf", "summary": "Measured streaming latency across combinations of Auracast transmitters with hearing aids and earbuds, and output level across transmitter and earbud combinations.", "findings": [ "Latency varied widely between transmitter and receiver combinations. Every measured latency exceeded the 25-40 ms target range that the authors attribute to the Bluetooth SIG, and some exceeded 80 ms. Earbuds were generally much slower than hearing aids.", "Output level, measured on a KEMAR manikin with speech-shaped noise, varied widely between transmitter-earbud pairs, and the effect of a volume change depended on which device's volume (audio source, transmitter or earbud) was changed." ], "limitations": "Conference synopsis; device models, number of devices and full data not listed. Output level was measured with earbuds only, not hearing aids.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "device-compatibility", "audio-level", "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "australia-2026-transport-standards-amendment", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/australia-2026-transport-standards-amendment/", "title": "Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport Amendment 2026 (F2026L01002), with its explanatory statement and the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport Guidelines 2026", "authors": "Attorney-General of Australia; Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts", "publisher": "Federal Register of Legislation (Australian Government)", "date": "2026-07-30", "kind": "Regulation (legislative instrument under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Australian Government; made by the Attorney-General on 27 July 2026 and registered on 30 July 2026)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2026L01002/asmade", "summary": "The 2026 reform of Australia's public transport accessibility rules, which keeps the existing hearing augmentation requirement for public address systems, adds signs for spaces with hearing augmentation and links some help devices and lift alarms to it.", "findings": [ "Keeps sections 26.1 (premises and infrastructure) and 26.2 (buses, coaches, ferries, trains, trams and light rail), under which an installed public address system must comply with clause 21.1 of AS 1428.2 (1992) on hearing augmentation; the explanatory statement says the changes to these sections only update drafting and do not otherwise affect their content or operation.", "Adds section 17.3: where a space contains a hearing augmentation system, a sign must give the type of system, the area it covers and, if receivers are used, where to obtain them, with the international symbol for deafness.", "Requires a lift's emergency warning system to include a hearing augmentation system, and a hearing loop used for it to comply with clause 3.2 of AS 1428.5 (2021); a passenger's device for requesting a boarding ramp or similar must be linked to a hearing augmentation system if it has an audio system.", "Section 27.6 requires next-stop information visible from priority seats and allocated spaces and audible next-stop announcements in multi-stop conveyances (except taxis and aircraft), with a note pointing to section 26.2 for hearing augmentation.", "The Guidelines 2026 registered with it say that if hearing augmentation requirements for conveyances cannot be met for technical reasons, an equivalent access process may be considered, and that assistive listening systems need testing for electromagnetic interference before deployment and maintenance every 6 to 12 months.", "None of the three documents mentions Bluetooth or Auracast.", "Schedule 34, section 35.14 item 4, applies section 13.4 to new premises and infrastructure and to lifts installed on or after commencement. Section 35.18 item 3 applies section 17.3 to signage installed on or after commencement.", "The application tables for sections 13.4 and 17.3 exclude premises covered by the Premises Standards. Section 17.3 also applies to infrastructure and to buses, coaches, ferries, trains, trams and light rail. Schedule 26 retains the same premises exclusion for section 26.1 and lists those six conveyance types for section 26.2.", "Schedule 26 and the explanatory statement's paragraphs 321-326 establish the retained hearing-augmentation reference and application tables. The amendment text does not reproduce the complete unamended public-address trigger, so the country table confines that row to the retained reference." ], "limitations": "Read from the instrument, explanatory statement and guidelines as registered; the instrument commences after the period in which Parliament can disallow it, which had not been checked on 9 October 2026, and many provisions apply only to new conveyances or after transition periods. The content of AS 1428.2 (1992) clause 21.1 is not given in these documents; the 2022 consultation impact statement describes it as covering 10% of a vehicle's enclosed area. The 2022 proposal to move vehicles to AS 1428.5 (2021) whole-vehicle coverage does not appear in Part 26 as made.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs", "transport" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-sheldon-road-profile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-sheldon-road-profile/", "title": "Auracast location profile: Sheldon Road Methodist Church", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (Auracast website)", "date": "2026-07-28", "kind": "Case study article (Bluetooth SIG location profile)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-profile-sheldon-road-methodist-church/", "summary": "A short profile of a church in Chippenham, England, that added an affordable Auracast transmitter to the hearing loop it had run for decades.", "findings": [ "Reports that the church's long-standing hearing loop did not serve members whose hearing aids lacked loop compatibility, including a member whose hearing aids received Auracast, who donated a transmitter.", "Describes a do-it-yourself installation in which the church's technical team gave the Auracast transmitter the same audio feed already sent to the hearing loop, with no major changes to the sound system.", "States that the church runs the loop and Auracast side by side and plans to keep both for as long as needed." ], "limitations": "Promotional material from the trademark owner. One small venue, an early deployment, no numbers of users for either system and no measurements.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "auri-2026-courtrooms-app-note", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/auri-2026-courtrooms-app-note/", "title": "Auri for courtrooms: application guide (UP1B609-01)", "authors": "Listen Technologies and Ampetronic (Auri)", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2026-07-23", "kind": "Manufacturer application note", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies and Ampetronic, which make and sell the Auri Auracast transmitters and receivers described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/UP1B609-1_Auri_App_note_Courtrooms.pdf", "summary": "A maker's guide to deploying its Auracast system in courtrooms, with encryption, court-issued receivers and controlled access for sensitive proceedings.", "findings": [ "Presents two operating models: an open broadcast, recommended for public proceedings and accessibility, and managed access with court-issued receivers preconfigured for approved broadcasts, recommended for sensitive environments.", "For restricted proceedings, recommends encrypting the broadcast with a Privacy Key, assigning unique keys, giving connection credentials only to approved listeners (for example through restricted QR codes or NFC at the courtroom entry or a security point) and rotating keys between proceedings.", "Says the maker's receiver can be locked to one channel or set to connect automatically to a chosen broadcast, so that listeners cannot scan for other broadcasts.", "Recommends setting transmitter output to suit the courtroom and checking coverage at the courtroom boundary to limit spill, while stating that \"Range should be treated as a coverage parameter—not a security mechanism\".", "Expects courts increasingly to need to support approved users who join with their own compatible devices as Auracast spreads." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's application note for its own products, with no measurements of range, spill or listener success and no court named as a user. Dated from the PDF's creation date (23 July 2026); the note itself carries no date.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2026-venucast-test", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2026-venucast-test/", "title": "Tested for you: the Avantree Venucast Oasis Aura Auracast transmitter (in German)", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "date": "2026-07-16", "kind": "Product test", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association; test units supplied free by the manufacturer, Pro Audito not paid)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/news/fuer-sie-getestet-auracast-sender-avantree-venucast-oasis-aura/", "summary": "A short hands-on test of a mid-priced Auracast transmitter and its clip receivers, with latency measured through hearing aids and receivers.", "findings": [ "Measured latency was 65 to 75 ms through the hearing aids used, 65 ms with the maker's AuraClip receivers and 57 ms with the fastest receiver tested. Pro Audito put this in the range of professional transmitters with those hearing aids.", "In a short test, range was comparable to professional transmitters; no distances are given.", "The software sets the name, PIN code and quality (24 kHz standard for hearing aids, 48 kHz high quality for headphones and some hearing aids), generates a QR code or the URI string, and sends the PIN code wirelessly to the supplied AuraClip receivers when they are switched on (the test setup and configuration-software findings).", "The receivers worked with ordinary inductive neck loops, with about 8 hours of battery life when driving one; the maker offered no inductive neck loops of its own at the time.", "Gaps noted: no signal-level meter in the software or on the transmitter, which makes the correct level harder to set; no balanced inputs; no wall or ceiling mounting. Pro Audito placed the system between consumer TV streamers and professional transmitters.", "Gives a retail price of about CHF 120 for the transmitter.", "The introduction states that the unpaid test used one Oasis Aura transmitter and three AuraClip receivers with a charging station and cables, supplied free by Avantree. The number and models of hearing aids used are not stated." ], "limitations": "Short test of one system supplied free by the manufacturer; the page does not specify whether the devices were loaned or given. Firmware, test room, distances and hearing-aid models are not stated. In German.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "audio-level", "loan-receivers", "privacy", "lifetime-costs", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "medel-2026-audiolink-xt", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/medel-2026-audiolink-xt/", "title": "What Is AudioLink XT and How Is It Different From AudioLink?", "authors": "MED-EL", "publisher": "The MED-EL Blog", "date": "2026-07-15", "kind": "Manufacturer article", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (MED-EL)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://blog.medel.com/technology/what-is-audiolink-xt-and-how-is-it-different-from-audiolink/", "summary": "MED-EL's comparison of its two connectivity accessories for cochlear implant processors, including the telecoil built into the newer AudioLink XT.", "findings": [ "AudioLink works with the SONNET, SONNET 2 and RONDO 3 processors. AudioLink XT works directly with SONNET 3, and with older processors through AudioStream or the AudioStream Adapter.", "AudioLink XT has an integrated telecoil, which MED-EL calls \"ideal for hearing well in large, echoey venues\"; the original AudioLink has none.", "AudioLink XT receives FM with a plug-in FM Adapter, where AudioLink needed an FM cover on the processor, and MED-EL gives its range as 10-15 m against 3 m.", "Both devices work as remote microphones and stream from non-smart TVs; AudioLink XT can also stream to an ASHA-compatible hearing aid on the other ear.", "Quotes a SONNET 3 user who, at some meetings, plugs in \"a personal telecoil loop supplied by the venue\" and streams the proceedings to the implant." ], "limitations": "A maker's blog post about its own accessories, with user quotes chosen by the maker. It gives no measurements of the telecoil's sensitivity or frequency response and does not mention Auracast (MED-EL's April 2025 post on Auracast is a separate record).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "goncalves-2026-codas", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/goncalves-2026-codas/", "title": "Auracast and hearing devices: a scoping review on connectivity and accessibility for individuals with hearing loss in public environments", "authors": "Gonçalves LM, Ortega AVM, Angelo TCS, Moret ALM, Lopes NBF, Jacob RTS", "publisher": "CoDAS 38(4):e20250241 (University of São Paulo)", "date": "2026-07-06", "kind": "Peer-reviewed scoping review", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (University of São Paulo; FAPESP grant and a PIBIC scholarship)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.scielo.br/j/codas/a/B6cCLqxHb3XwKcLPLtZfZ6p/?lang=en", "summary": "Maps what was published about Auracast and hearing aids in public places between June 2022 and April 2025, following JBI and PRISMA-ScR methods.", "findings": [ "Searched scientific databases and grey literature for the single keyword \"Auracast\"; 348 records were found and 17 documents published from 2023 to 2025 were included.", "Most included documents were technical, descriptive or opinion pieces from manufacturers, conferences and advocates; the authors report a significant gap in clinical or experimental studies of Auracast's effect on hearing, listening effort or hearing-aid use in real-world settings.", "Several included sources tie wide adoption to IEC 60118-17, which they report as expected in December 2027.", "Notes that, at the time of the review, Auracast-enabled hearing aids were not available in product lines for children.", "Calls for studies in schools, healthcare and transport settings, and of how Auracast works alongside remote microphones and telecoils." ], "limitations": "The search used only the term \"Auracast\" and only freely available full texts in Portuguese, English or Spanish, up to April 2025. Many included documents are not peer-reviewed, and the review does not grade their quality.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "future-proofing", "listener-reach", "loop-and-auracast", "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2026-auracast-overview", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2026-auracast-overview/", "title": "Bluetooth Auracast für Fachpersonen", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz (in German)", "date": "2026-07-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Guidance and device list", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/pro-audito-schweiz/was-wir-tun/auracast/", "summary": "Pro Audito's professional Auracast overview includes a phone list that distinguishes broadcasting and assistant functions, under a Q&A heading dated July 2026.", "findings": [ "Lists Samsung Galaxy S23 and newer except S23 FE, Z Fold5 and newer, and Z Flip5 and newer as supporting both transmission and an assistant, under a Samsung heading specifying One UI 6.1 or later.", "Lists Google Pixel 8 and newer except Pixel 8a and Pixel 9a, plus Xiaomi 14T, 14T Pro, 14, 14 Ultra, 15, 15 Ultra and MIX Flip, in the transmission-and-assistant group. It gives no OS version for Google or Xiaomi.", "Separately lists Galaxy S20 series and newer, Z Fold4, Z Flip4, A54 5G, A55 5G and M54 5G as assistant-capable without transmission. The broad S20-and-newer wording overlaps the transmission list; it cannot establish that all later Galaxy S models lack transmission.", "States that Apple has not activated Auracast in iPhones and other named Apple product categories. It treats newer Bluetooth hardware only as a possible basis for a future update, whose availability and technical feasibility it does not establish.", "Defines an assistant as a way to control receivers such as hearing aids, headphones and speakers, including finding and choosing streams and entering access codes, through receiver apps or compatible phones." ], "limitations": "An advocacy guidance page and list, not a model-by-model test. The Q&A says July 2026, but embedded material has other dates, including an August 2026 hearing-device list; the phone passages have no individual revision dates. The S20-and-newer grouping overlaps the separate newer-Samsung group. Assistant listings do not identify compatible hearing aids, firmware, success rates or whether each listed phone uses built-in controls or an app. The page's separate claim that hearing aids receive only Standard Quality is broader than later manufacturer evidence for Phonak EON; this record retains only the phone and assistant findings.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "dhv-dcig-dsb-2026-auracast-position", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dhv-dcig-dsb-2026-auracast-position/", "title": "Gemeinsames Positionspapier zu Auracast (Joint position paper on Auracast)", "authors": "Deutscher Hörverband, Deutsche Cochlea Implantat Gesellschaft and Deutscher Schwerhörigenbund", "publisher": "Deutscher Schwerhörigenbund (in German)", "date": "2026-07-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Position statement", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (three German self-help associations of people with hearing loss and cochlear implant users)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://schwerhoerigen-netz.de/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/DHVDSBDCIG_Positionspapier_Auracast.pdf", "summary": "The joint position of Germany's main associations of hard-of-hearing people and cochlear implant users on Auracast, with recommendations for venues during the transition from induction loops.", "findings": [ "Says Auracast-based systems could in the long run replace inductive transmission, and that installing them is in many cases cheaper than installing an induction loop, especially in existing buildings.", "Holds that inductive transmission remains the established standard for people with severe hearing loss who depend on wireless hearing support, and must stay available for the foreseeable future.", "Expects Auracast to reach hearing devices for the mass market of people with milder hearing loss first, and asks that power hearing aids and cochlear implant processors get Auracast reception as soon as possible, at no extra charge, including in devices covered by statutory health insurance.", "Says long usage cycles of hearing devices mean many years will pass before Auracast is widely used, so inductive systems must remain usable during the transition.", "Recommends for the next few years: in new installations, an inductive system combined with a prepared or integrated Auracast solution; for existing induction loops, an added Auracast transmitter that reuses the existing microphones; loan receivers with headphones or a neckloop, easy to operate and with low latency, for people without Auracast; and well-organised lending and maintenance.", "Lists latency, data protection, choosing the right stream (especially when a phone or assistant device is needed) and the usability of loan receivers among the challenges, and asks that receivers work with every maker's transmitters at the same quality, including latency.", "States that installing Auracast systems \"ist in vielen Fällen kostengünstiger als die von Induktiven Höranlagen, insbesondere in Bestandsbauten\" (is in many cases cheaper than installing induction loops, especially in existing buildings), while induction remains the established standard for people with severe hearing loss and must stay available for the foreseeable future.", "Names the obstacles to wide use: delay, data protection and security, ease of choosing the right stream when a smartphone or assistant device is needed, and ease of use of loan receivers for people without a hearing system or whose system cannot receive Auracast.", "Recommends for the coming years: new installations combining a loop with a prepared or integrated Auracast solution; existing loops supplemented by an Auracast transmitter that reuses the existing microphones; mobile loan receivers with headphones or a neckloop; and user-friendly organisation of lending and maintenance.", "Asks that Auracast be added to all hearing aids and cochlear implant processors, including power aids, at no extra charge, also in the basic devices covered by statutory health insurance, and that receivers work equally well, for example in latency, with transmitters of every make." ], "limitations": "A position paper without data or references. The letterhead says Berlin, July 2026; the file name suggests the text is dated 30 June 2026. In German; summarised here in English.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "lifetime-costs", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "ausit-2026-hearing-loop-receivers", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ausit-2026-hearing-loop-receivers/", "title": "Hearing loop receivers for use in court", "authors": "AUSIT (Australian Institute of Interpreters and Translators)", "publisher": "AUSIT", "date": "2026-07-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Professional guidance for interpreters", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (AUSIT, the national professional association of interpreters and translators in Australia)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://ausit.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Hearing-Loops-for-use-in-court.pdf", "summary": "A one-page note telling court interpreters in Australia how to use the court's listening receivers, which it calls hearing loop receivers.", "findings": [ "Says all courts should have the receivers readily available and provide them to interpreters on request; the receiver, about the size of a mobile phone, is used with new detachable earphones that the interpreter keeps.", "Describes the microphones in front of the judge, barristers and witness box as switched on \"at all times\", with the system relaying the voices they pick up to the receiver, and calls the receiver the most useful piece of assistive technology in the courtroom for an interpreter.", "Says a witness or defendant can also ask for a receiver, but warns that a listener who follows the proceedings through a receiver while the interpreter whispers the interpretation will hear the interpreter's voice both live and through the receiver, which makes whispered interpreting difficult.", "Notes that some courts also have separate simultaneous interpreting equipment, and advises interpreters on longer proceedings to ask for it." ], "limitations": "A tip sheet for interpreters, not a test. Although it calls them hearing loop receivers, it describes receivers used with earphones and does not name the transmission technology. Last updated July 2026, according to the note.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "irs-business-access-tax-incentives", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/irs-business-access-tax-incentives/", "title": "Tax benefits for businesses who have employees with disabilities", "authors": "Internal Revenue Service", "publisher": "Internal Revenue Service", "date": "2026-06-30", "kind": "Government tax guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (US Internal Revenue Service)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/tax-benefits-for-businesses-who-have-employees-with-disabilities", "summary": "IRS guidance distinguishes the nonrefundable small-business access credit from the deduction for qualified architectural and transportation barrier removal.", "findings": [ "The disabled access credit is nonrefundable and may be taken each year an eligible small business incurs access expenditures. The page gives the prior-year US$1 million receipts or 30 full-time employees eligibility thresholds and refers readers to Form 8826.", "Businesses of any size may deduct up to US$15,000 a year for qualified architectural and transportation barrier-removal expenses that would otherwise be capitalised.", "The credit and deduction may be used in the same tax year only when expenses meet both sets of requirements; the deduction then excludes the amount claimed as the credit." ], "limitations": "Date is the page’s last-reviewed-or-updated date. The page does not establish that any particular listening-system installation meets the barrier-removal deduction rules; it is not an equipment-specific approval.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-bap", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-bap/", "title": "Basic Audio Profile, version 1.0.3", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Generic Audio Working Group", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2026-06-23", "kind": "Specification", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/Files/Specification/HTML/bap_v1-0-3_1782503972/BAP_v1.0.3/out/en/index-en.html", "summary": "The Bluetooth LE Audio profile that sets the codec settings every broadcast transmitter and receiver must support, and defines Presentation Delay.", "findings": [ "Section 9.1 requires encrypted access to the ASCS, PACS and BASS characteristics using keys with at least 128 bits of entropy from the specified secure methods. Sections 9.1.3 and 9.1.4 require Broadcast Sources to support LE Security Mode 3 Level 1, encrypting sources to support Level 2, and Broadcast Sinks to support Levels 1 and 2; Level 3 is optional. The broadcast security levels and the encryption of the assistant-to-receiver control connection are separate requirements.", "Section 1 describes BAP as controlling audio streams over Bluetooth Low Energy for unicast and broadcast use. Sections 1.6 and 2.2.2 define Broadcast Source and Broadcast Sink roles; a source establishes groups of broadcast isochronous streams and advertises their configuration, while a sink discovers and receives the streams. A Broadcast Assistant discovers streams and transfers reception information and decryption codes to the receiving device's Scan Delegator.", "Table 3.14 and section 3.7.2.1.1 give Broadcast_ID as a three-octet identifier that helps scanning devices find a BIG and remains unchanged for that BIG's lifetime. Sections 1.6 and 3.7.2.2 define BASE as the Broadcast Audio Source Endpoint announcement structure, with codec and other parameters at group, subgroup and BIS levels; each subgroup contains streams intended to be decoded and presented together.", "Section 6.5 describes Broadcast_Codes as the information needed to decrypt encrypted broadcast streams. Section 7.1.1 defines Presentation_Delay for a Broadcast Sink or receiving Unicast Server from the SDU Synchronization Reference to the start of presentation. Sections 7.1 and 7.2 include device processing in Presentation_Delay and distinguish it from the actual transfer delay, Transport_Latency; for broadcast reception, total delay comprises Broadcast Source processing, transport latency and Broadcast Sink presentation delay.", "Every broadcast receiver must decode LC3 at 16 kHz (32 kbps) and 24 kHz (48 kbps) with 10 ms frames, and every broadcast transmitter must be able to send the 16 kHz setting; all 48 kHz settings are optional. Transmitters are advised to include at least one stream at a mandatory setting.", "Each mandatory setting has a low-latency form (2 retransmissions, 10 ms maximum transport latency) and a high-reliability form (4 retransmissions, 60 ms). The retransmission numbers are recommendations that the radio may change.", "Every broadcast setting in the table lists a Presentation Delay of 40 ms, and a broadcast receiver must be able to play audio no later than 40 ms after the stream's timing reference.", "Total system delay is the transmitter's own processing time plus the radio transport latency plus the receiver's Presentation Delay, which includes its decoding and processing. The transmitter's processing time is left to each product.", "Transmitters should place separate programmes or alternative versions of one programme (languages, mixes, dialogue-enhanced audio) in separate subgroups so listeners can choose between them.", "Table 6.4, footnote 4, makes the 40,000 microsecond Presentation Delay entry a Broadcast Sink capability requirement; it is not a fixed total system delay. Section 7.2 separately includes source processing, transport latency and Presentation Delay in total delay.", "The Version History records Board adoption of version 1.0 on 14 September 2021, version 1.0.1 on 21 June 2022, version 1.0.2 on 1 October 2024 and version 1.0.3 on 23 June 2026. The abstract describes distribution and reception of audio over Bluetooth LE.", "Section 1.4.1, Table 1.1, lists errata incorporated from version 1.0.1 to 1.0.2, including Broadcast_ID, Basic Audio Announcements and Broadcast Audio Stream configuration. It does not describe the changes from 1.0 to 1.0.1.", "Section 1.4.2, Table 1.2, lists errata incorporated from version 1.0.2 to 1.0.3, including Broadcast Source audio capability configuration, Basic Audio Announcements, Broadcast Audio Stream configuration, and adding and modifying broadcast sources. The table identifies affected procedures rather than measured improvements.", "Section 3.7.2.2 and Figure 3.1 illustrate one BIG containing four BISes in two subgroups: left and right Spanish audio in one, left and right English audio in the other. Subgroups and their metadata can supply user-interface choices. Sections 4.3.4.5-4.3.4.7 illustrate separate stereo and mono subgroup arrangements.", "Tables 3.11 and 6.4 include 48 kHz LC3 configurations at 80 and 96 kbps with either 7.5 or 10 ms frames, plus 124.8 kbps with 7.5 ms frames and 124 kbps with 10 ms frames. These are per-channel codec rates; the 48 kHz configurations are optional for Broadcast Sinks.", "Table 3.17 lists Broadcast Sink decoding support for 16 kHz/32 kbps and 24 kHz/48 kbps at 10 ms as mandatory, and their 7.5 ms counterparts as optional. Table 6.4 separates audio SDU sizes from retransmission settings; footnote 2 scales the SDU size by channel count and codec-frame blocks. The listed codec rates therefore exclude radio overhead and retransmissions." ], "limitations": "Defines what devices must support, not how a venue system is set up or measured.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "device-compatibility", "large-venues", "auracast-multiple-streams", "broadcast-security", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "northumberland-2026-infrared-council-court", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/northumberland-2026-infrared-council-court/", "title": "New assistive listening technology enhances access to council and court proceedings", "authors": "Northumberland County", "publisher": "Northumberland County, Ontario (news release)", "date": "2026-06-11", "kind": "Press release (local government)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Government (Northumberland County, Ontario; the system was funded by a provincial accessibility grant from the Ontario Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://northumberland.ca/news/new-assistive-listening-technology-enhances-access-to-council-and-court-proceedings/", "summary": "An Ontario county's announcement of infrared assistive listening in its council chambers and its provincial offences courtroom.", "findings": [ "Reports that the council chambers at the county headquarters in Cobourg and the Provincial Offences courtroom in Cobourg were equipped with an infrared assistive listening system, funded by the province's Enhancing Access to Spaces for Everyone (EASE) grant.", "Quotes a county councillor who wears hearing aids as saying that using the headphones during a trial at the May council meeting \"significantly improved my ability to hear and follow the discussion\".", "Describes the system as carrying audio from a microphone, computer or sound system through an infrared transmitter to receivers that deliver it to headphones, hearing aids or cochlear implants.", "Receivers for council and committee meetings must be requested online at least one business day ahead; in the courtroom they are available from the clerk on arrival." ], "limitations": "A press release with one user's account and no measurements, receiver numbers or costs. It does not say why infrared was chosen or whether neckloops are offered. Its EASE funding paragraph gives no award amount, full applicant eligibility rules or application window.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers", "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "listen-2026-listenwifi-user-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2026-listenwifi-user-manual/", "title": "ListenWIFI User Manual", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (online documentation)", "date": "2026-06-10", "kind": "Manufacturer user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the ListenWIFI system described, which also sells RF, infrared, hearing loop and Auracast products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/docs/listenwifi-user-manual/", "summary": "Listen Technologies' online manual for ListenWIFI, which streams venue audio over the Wi-Fi network to an app on listeners' phones and to the maker's own Wi-Fi receivers.", "findings": [ "States that each server supports up to 500 listening devices, phones and receivers together, on 2 to 16 channels depending on the model, and that servers stacked on one network can reach 512 channels and 16,000 users.", "Recommends involving the venue's IT staff, because network and firewall settings may block the traffic. If the network blocks multicast DNS, servers have to be added by IP address. Audio packets carry a quality-of-service tag, and the manual suggests some experimentation with the tag and with voice or video priority to get lower latency and fewer dropouts.", "Describes the ways to join: choosing the venue network in the phone's settings or scanning a Wi-Fi QR code, then picking a channel in the app, scanning a channel QR code, or being switched automatically by Bluetooth beacons placed in each room. It presents beacons as a way to keep listeners on their own room's channel without passwords.", "System Set-Up, step 9 (Functional Testing), asks installers to check network and server connections, channel access, audio quality and latency using both a smartphone and a dedicated receiver, including automatic selection on entering beacon zones. The beacon Installation section asks for coverage of the intended room and a stronger signal there than from other beacons, to avoid selecting another room's channel.", "Recommends wired headphones, or a neckloop for hearing aids with a telecoil, and says Bluetooth devices are \"not recommended\" because of the significant latency they can add.", "Says dedicated Wi-Fi receivers are \"often required\" for venues that must meet laws mandating that receivers be available, listing \"(ADA/CBC/IBC/DDA/etc.)\". The receivers take wired headphones or a neckloop and typically charge in 2 to 3 hours.", "States that the app is free \"without any advertisements\", and that keeping servers and other components updated is essential for compatibility with current smartphones and operating systems.", "Mobile App, Operational Instructions, step 1 states that the mobile app is free to download with no recurring payments required. This statement prices the app alone; it does not price the venue's server, network, receivers or support." ], "limitations": "A maker's manual: the capacity figures are its own, with no test conditions or network described, and it gives no latency figures and no receiver battery life. The online manual changes over time; the date is the 'updated' date shown on the page, and its metadata gives first publication on 14 May 2025. It links an accessibility calculator for receiver numbers under US, Californian and Australian rules.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks", "lifetime-costs", "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "avixa-2026-infocomm-audio-education", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/avixa-2026-infocomm-audio-education/", "title": "Explore Education Sessions on Audio at InfoComm 2026", "authors": "Iulia Popescu (AVIXA)", "publisher": "AVIXA", "date": "2026-06-08", "kind": "Trade-show education programme", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (AVIXA event education article; the Auracast session described is presented by two Williams AV employees, an assistive listening manufacturer)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.avixa.org/explore/articles/explore-education-sessions-on-audio-at-infocomm-2026", "summary": "AVIXA lists a manufacturer-led Auracast design session at InfoComm 2026 with continuing-education credit.", "findings": [ "Lists a 16 June 2026 session on Auracast broadcast audio in practice, including 2.4 GHz design considerations and a site-survey document for attendees.", "Names the presenters as Tony Braun and Ricardo Ehramjian of Williams AV.", "Offers one CTS or CTS-D renewal unit for attending that session." ], "limitations": "An event programme, not the session recording, handout or an assessment of attendees. Attendance credit does not show that a participant passed a practical installer examination. The page gives 8 June 2026 as its article date and 18 August 2026 as an update; the original AVIXA Xchange link now redirects to this article.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "cept-erc-rec-70-03", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cept-erc-rec-70-03/", "title": "ERC Recommendation 70-03 relating to the use of Short Range Devices (SRD), Annex 10: radio microphone applications including assistive listening devices", "authors": "CEPT Electronic Communications Committee (ECC)", "publisher": "European Communications Office (ECO Documentation Database)", "date": "2026-06-05", "kind": "Regulatory recommendation (European spectrum)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (CEPT, the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations, whose Electronic Communications Committee brings together national spectrum regulators)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://docdb.cept.org/document/845", "summary": "The CEPT reference for the radio bands and power limits European countries may open to assistive listening devices and systems; national rules can differ.", "findings": [ "Designates for assistive listening devices 169.4-169.475 MHz and 169.4875-169.5875 MHz at up to 500 mW e.r.p., 173.965-216 MHz at 10 mW e.r.p., and 863-865 MHz at 10 mW e.r.p. (shared with radio microphones and personal cordless audio devices).", "Designates 1656.5-1660.5 MHz for assistive listening systems at 2 mW per 600 kHz e.i.r.p., under the conditions in ECC Report 270; an individual licence may be required.", "For 173.965-216 MHz, which digital radio (DAB) also uses, requires a threshold of 35 dBµV/m to protect a DAB receiver 1.5 m from the device and operation at least 300 kHz from the edge of an occupied DAB channel, and warns that assistive listening devices may have to move if broadcast use changes.", "Lists 100 Hz-9 kHz for inductive loop systems for people with hearing loss, at 120 dBµA/m at 10 m.", "Describes assistive listening systems as serving people with hearing loss in public spaces such as airports, railway stations, churches and theatres, with receivers worn by users or built into their hearing aids.", "States that not every entry is available in every country: national restrictions are in its appendices and the EFIS database, and national licensing restrictions are likely in the 174-216 MHz broadcasting band." ], "limitations": "A recommendation to national administrations, not law in itself; what a given country allows must be checked in its national rules, as the document says. It sets spectrum and power only, not audio performance or coverage. The edition read is dated 5 June 2026 (latest amendment); its Annex 10 pages are marked as the October 2025 edition.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "rnid-hearing-loops-listeners", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-hearing-loops-listeners/", "title": "Hearing loops", "authors": "RNID", "publisher": "RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People)", "date": "2026-05-27", "kind": "Advocacy guidance for listeners", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (RNID, UK charity)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://rnid.org.uk/information-and-support/technology-and-products/assistive-listening/hearing-loops/", "summary": "RNID explains the preparation and controls needed to listen to a venue loop through a hearing device, loop listener or streaming accessory.", "findings": [ "A listener needs a telecoil receiver; an audiologist needs to set up the telecoil programme in a hearing device. RNID advises asking the audiologist when the programme is absent or the listener is unsure.", "The programme may be called the loop programme or T setting. Selecting it may require more than one press of the hearing device's button; some devices also offer selection through an app or dedicated remote control.", "A battery-powered loop listener with headphones provides access for people without a hearing device with a telecoil programme. A compatible streaming accessory can also receive the loop and send its audio to hearing devices.", "The signal level depends on telecoil orientation; rotating the telecoil can make the sound louder or quieter." ], "limitations": "Consumer instructions, with no usability sample or measured completion rates. The date is the displayed last update. Advice about NHS device availability is specific to the UK.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "using-each-system" ] }, { "id": "rnid-2026-infrared-fm-wifi", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-2026-infrared-fm-wifi/", "title": "Infrared, FM and Audio Over WiFi", "authors": "RNID", "publisher": "RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People)", "date": "2026-05-27", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (RNID, UK charity)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Infrared", "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://rnid.org.uk/information-and-support/technology-and-products/assistive-listening/infrared-fm-and-audio-over-wifi/", "summary": "RNID's consumer page on the alternatives to hearing loops that people may meet in venues: infrared, FM and audio over Wi-Fi.", "findings": [ "Says that where venues cannot use hearing loops, \"In most cases, Auracast is now the preferred solution\", although infrared, FM and Wi-Fi systems are still in use.", "Describes infrared as common in theatres and cinemas and received with a receiver the venue usually lends, with headphones or a neckloop. It says infrared is not affected by metal or other interference and does not pass through walls or around corners, which suits rooms where privacy matters but means transmitters need an unobstructed path.", "Describes audio over Wi-Fi as sound sent to an app on the listener's phone or tablet and heard through Bluetooth, a neckloop or headphones, and names being able to use one's own device as its benefit.", "States that Wi-Fi networks \"often add too much delay to the signal\", which can make listening worse.", "The Audio over WiFi section identifies a microphone or sound system as the input sent over the Wi-Fi connection to the phone or tablet app." ], "limitations": "A short consumer explainer with no data or references; the statement on delay gives no figures. Its FM paragraph describes radio aids used mostly in classrooms and workplaces rather than venue systems. The date is the page's last update.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "listener-preference", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "infrared-limits", "theatres-and-cinemas", "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "rnid-check-hearing-loop", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-check-hearing-loop/", "title": "How to check a hearing loop is working", "authors": "RNID", "publisher": "RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People)", "date": "2026-05-26", "kind": "Advocacy guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (RNID, UK charity; the page states that RNID receives 10% of loop-listener purchases through its Connevans links and 5% of referred hearing-loop installations by Contacta)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://rnid.org.uk/employers-and-professionals/providing-communication-support/check-hearing-loop/", "summary": "A practical listening check at the expected hearing-device position, with troubleshooting for power, connections, controls and receiver batteries.", "findings": [ "Says common reasons for a non-working loop include power being off and a disconnected cable.", "Places a loop listener at the expected reception point, usually head height, with its headphone volume initially low and then raised slowly.", "For a distant microphone, asks another person to speak into it, or uses a loudspeaker positioned where the talker would be and set to normal speech loudness.", "If no sound is heard, checks connections, power, gain settings and loop-listener batteries, then recommends professional support if the problem remains." ], "limitations": "Operational guidance, not a field-strength or frequency-response measurement procedure and not a study of failure rates. The page labels 26 May 2026 as its last update. RNID states financial interests in the equipment and installation referrals.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "portable-and-counter-loops", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "rnid-2026-loops-for-venues", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-2026-loops-for-venues/", "title": "Providing a hearing loop in your venue or business", "authors": "RNID", "publisher": "RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People)", "date": "2026-05-26", "kind": "Advocacy guidance page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (RNID, UK charity; the page refers businesses to its installation partner Contacta Systems, a hearing loop maker and installer, and states that RNID receives a 5% donation for every assistive listening system Contacta installs through its dedicated email address)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://rnid.org.uk/employers-and-professionals/providing-communication-support/hearing-loops/", "summary": "RNID's page for UK businesses on installing, fixing and maintaining hearing loops.", "findings": [ "Recommends: \"We recommend you maintain your hearing loop every 12 months\", and says its installation partner Contacta offers annual maintenance and service call schemes.", "Says members of RNID's communities sometimes visit venues where hearing loops are installed but do not work, and links to its guidance on checking that a loop works.", "Describes BS 8300, revised in 2018, as the most detailed UK code of practice on integrating assistive listening, and cites the Equality Act 2010 and the Building Regulations.", "Says Contacta's engineers design systems that meet \"industry standards\", without naming IEC 60118-4." ], "limitations": "Guidance with no data. It does not say what the annual maintenance should include or name the performance standard. RNID has a financial interest in referrals to its partner, which the page states; its companion page on checking a loop with a loop listener held at head height states that RNID receives 10% of sales of loop listeners bought through its links. The date is the page's last update (first published 21 December 2022, per its metadata).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification", "loop-and-auracast", "lifetime-costs", "places-of-worship", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "consumer-reports-2026-telecoils", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/consumer-reports-2026-telecoils/", "title": "A Telecoil is One of the Best Hearing Aid Features. Many Still Aren't Using It.", "authors": "Roberts C", "publisher": "Consumer Reports", "date": "2026-05-07", "kind": "Consumer magazine article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (Consumer Reports, a nonprofit consumer organisation; article by Catherine Roberts, a health and science journalist on its staff, quoting loop advocates from the Center for Hearing Access and HLAA and an assistive listening installer)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.consumerreports.org/health/hearing-aids/one-of-best-hearing-aid-features-many-still-arent-using-a4102935824/", "summary": "A consumer magazine report on telecoils and hearing loops, with recent figures on how many hearing aid models and owners have a telecoil.", "findings": [ "Citing the Consumer's Guide to Hearing Aids, reports that 59% of the prescription hearing aid models listed in its 2026 issue had a manual telecoil (standard or optional), down from 79% of listed models in the 2016 issue. Participation in the guide is voluntary.", "In Consumer Reports' 2023 survey of members with hearing aids, 10% said their prescription hearing aids had a telecoil.", "Says over-the-counter hearing aids typically lack telecoils, and that telecoils which switch on automatically work only with telephones, not with hearing loops.", "Reports two advocates' explanations for the decline: makers market smaller aids, which can sacrifice the telecoil (Wynne Whyman, Center for Hearing Access), and new product lines often launch with a small flagship model without a telecoil, with telecoils more common in later models (Juliëtte Sterkens). Experts also say many buyers are never told telecoils exist.", "Reports experts' view that Auracast is five to ten years from wide availability, that Auracast assistive listening standards are not expected until 2027, and their advice to choose a hearing aid or cochlear implant with both a telecoil and Auracast at the next upgrade." ], "limitations": "Journalism rather than research. The 59% and 79% figures are shares of models listed in a voluntary guide, not of hearing aids sold or in use; the 10% figure is self-report from Consumer Reports members, some of whom may not know whether their aids have a telecoil. The article does not give the sample size behind the 10% member-survey figure (section on barriers to telecoil and loop use). Most experts quoted are loop advocates.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "telecoil-fitting", "loop-and-auracast", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "sennheiser-2026-mobileconnect-app", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sennheiser-2026-mobileconnect-app/", "title": "Sennheiser MobileConnect (App Store listing, version 6.3.1)", "authors": "Sennheiser", "publisher": "Apple App Store (seller: Sennheiser electronic SE & Co. KG)", "date": "2026-05-04", "kind": "Manufacturer app store listing", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sennheiser, maker of the MobileConnect Wi-Fi system; the listing and its privacy label are written by the developer)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://apps.apple.com/us/app/sennheiser-mobileconnect/id848127271", "summary": "Sennheiser's App Store listing for MobileConnect, the app through which listeners hear a venue's Wi-Fi audio stream on their own iPhone or iPad.", "findings": [ "Advises: \"To avoid audio delay through Bluetooth, we recommend wired headphones or induction ear hooks.\"", "Describes the app as part of a Wi-Fi audio streaming system for live events, for uses including assistive listening and live translation, and lists among its benefits: \"Connect your headphones, neck loop or preferred hearing aids\", using one's own device instead of rental equipment, and choosing a channel from a list or by QR code.", "Requires iOS 15.6 or later. Its privacy label lists coarse location, device identifiers, product interaction and diagnostic data, described as not linked to the user's identity, with \"Analytics\" as the purpose given for collecting them." ], "limitations": "A maker's self-written store listing, read on 9 October 2026; listings and privacy labels change with each release. The date is the release of version 6.3.1 in the listing's version history, and the description may be older. It gives no delay figures for any listening path, and Sennheiser's data sheet gives the app's latency without saying which path it applies to.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "abcb-2026-ncc-building-classification", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/abcb-2026-ncc-building-classification/", "title": "National Construction Code 2025, Volume One, Part A6 Building classification (A6G10 Class 9 buildings)", "authors": "Australian Building Codes Board", "publisher": "Australian Building Codes Board (NCC online)", "date": "2026-05-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Building code", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Australian Building Codes Board)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/editions/ncc-2025/adopted/volume-one/a-governing-requirements/part-a6-building-classification", "summary": "The part of Australia's model building code that sorts buildings into classes; its explanatory information places churches in Class 9b, the class whose rooms trigger the code's hearing augmentation clause.", "findings": [ "Clause A6G10 defines Class 9 buildings as buildings of a public nature, and Class 9b as an assembly building, including a trade workshop or laboratory in a primary or secondary school.", "Its explanatory information says Class 9b buildings can include theatres, cinemas and halls, churches, schools, early childhood centres, sports centres and stadiums, nightclubs, public halls and dance halls, and bus and railway stations.", "Says a building can be a mixture of Class 9b and another class, or be treated as Class 9b as a whole when another use takes up only a small part of a storey." ], "limitations": "The list of examples that names churches sits in explanatory information under the clause; the clause itself says only \"assembly building\". It names churches but not synagogues, mosques or temples. NCC 2025 was published on 1 May 2026 and is adopted by states and territories on their own dates, so NCC 2022 may still apply. The hearing augmentation rules themselves are in Part D4 (a separate record).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship", "stadiums-and-arenas", "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "abcb-2026-ncc-hearing-augmentation", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/abcb-2026-ncc-hearing-augmentation/", "title": "National Construction Code 2025, Volume One, Part D4: D4D7 Signage and D4D8 Hearing augmentation", "authors": "Australian Building Codes Board", "publisher": "Australian Building Codes Board (NCC online)", "date": "2026-05-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Building code", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Australian Building Codes Board)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/editions/ncc-2025/adopted/volume-one/d-access-and-egress/part-d4-access-people-disability", "summary": "Australia's model building code clauses on where hearing augmentation is required, how much of the floor it must reach, how many receivers to provide and what the signs must say.", "findings": [ "Requires hearing augmentation where an inbuilt amplification system (other than one used only for emergency warning) is installed in a room in a Class 9b building, in an auditorium, conference room, meeting room or judicatory room, or at a ticket office, teller's booth or reception area where the public is screened from the service provider.", "Sets different coverage for the two kinds of system it names: an induction loop must serve at least 80% of the floor area served by the amplification system, while a system that needs \"receivers or the like\" must be available to at least 95% of that area.", "For receiver-based systems, sets minimum receiver numbers by persons accommodated: up to 500 persons, 1 per 25 persons or 2, whichever is greater; then 20 plus 1 per 33 over 500, 35 plus 1 per 50 over 1,000, and 55 plus 1 per 100 over 2,000. The clause sets no receiver count for loops and no hearing-aid-compatible share.", "D4D8(2)(b)(i)–(iv) counts any part of each 25-, 33-, 50- or 100-person increment towards another receiver, so fractional increments round up. D4D8(3) requires the persons accommodated to be calculated under D2D18.", "Inside a room with hearing augmentation, a sign with the international symbol for deafness must state the type of hearing augmentation, the area covered and, if receivers are used, where to get them; braille and tactile signs must identify each space that has a system.", "Neither clause mentions Bluetooth or Auracast.", "D4D7(1) applies to buildings required to be accessible and identifies spaces with hearing augmentation. Its signage duty does not repeat D4D8(1)’s inbuilt-amplification condition." ], "limitations": "Deemed-to-satisfy provisions of a model code. NCC 2025 was published on 1 May 2026, and states and territories adopt it on their own dates (several from 1 May 2027), so NCC 2022 may still apply. Counts persons accommodated (calculated under D2D18), not seats.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "commissioning-tests", "finding-and-joining", "service-counters", "loop-verification", "signage-and-awareness", "places-of-worship", "theatres-and-cinemas", "stadiums-and-arenas", "hotels-and-conference-centres", "lecture-halls", "school-auditoriums", "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "univox-2026-jarvenskolan", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/univox-2026-jarvenskolan/", "title": "Hearing loop and Auracast in Järvenskolan’s historic Auditorium", "authors": "Univox", "publisher": "Univox", "date": "2026-04-30", "kind": "Manufacturer installation case study", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Univox describing its own school installation, with Bettear broadcast equipment)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://univox.eu/news/hearing-loop-and-auracast-in-jarvenskolans-historic-auditorium/", "summary": "Univox reports a school auditorium using a loop over part of its seating, alongside Auracast and portable receivers.", "findings": [ "The linked two-page case study describes a heritage-listed auditorium in Katrineholm, Sweden, used by pupils and the wider community.", "Page 2 says the loop was installed in the rear tiered area, covering approximately 60% of the auditorium’s total seating capacity, because there was no access beneath the front floor. Cable was mounted on vertical riser faces.", "Page 1 describes portable receivers with headphones and neckloops for people without compatible devices; it does not describe a loan or collection procedure.", "Univox reports mounting the Auracast transmitter high on the front wall to stream throughout the space. The equipment list includes portable receivers, headphones, neckloops and a charger." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer coverage claims without occupied-room measurements, device test results or a listener sample. The 30 April 2026 date is on the announcement; the linked PDF is undated. Partial loop coverage must not be presented as coverage of every seat.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-qprd", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-qprd/", "title": "Qualification Program Reference Document, version 5", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2026-04-21", "kind": "Qualification program rules", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark; technical qualification rules)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/Files/Specification/HTML/QPRD/out/en/index-en.html", "summary": "The SIG’s qualification rules distinguish reuse of an unchanged design from new designs, define test evidence and review, and specify which product details the public can see.", "findings": [ "Sections 2 and 3 require a member to identify its product, design, specifications and supported features, submit the required information under its own account, and retain responsibility for accuracy and meeting the specifications.", "Option 1 in section 3.2.1 allows a single unchanged existing design with a Design Number, Qualified Design ID or Declaration ID. Table 3.2 marks a new feature statement, test declaration and test reports as not applicable for this route.", "For new designs, sections 3.2.2.3–3.2.2.5 require a feature consistency check and generate a test plan when testing is required. The plan includes new or modified layers and applicable interoperability tests; the exact requirements depend on the feature statement and selected Test Case Reference List package.", "Mandatory test cases must pass, subject to permitted inconclusive outcomes or an approved Test Coverage Waiver. Previous evidence may be reused for unaffected tests after changes that do not alter the feature statement; the member remains responsible.", "Appendix A requires validated test systems and a Bluetooth Qualification Test Facility or Bluetooth Recognized Test Facility for Category A tests in the specified radio, controller and lower interface layers. Other Category A tests and Category B tests can be performed by the member, a test facility or a third party, under their respective tool requirements.", "Appendix A makes Category X supplementary interoperability tests optional. These address scenarios without a direct specification reference and are recommended to improve interoperability.", "Section 3.5 describes SIG review of submitted material, including valid test reports, approved waivers and the specified Core Configuration. Approval leads to a Qualified Product database entry.", "Table 4.1 makes the member name, product name, model number, description and product website public from the publication date. The feature statement and Test Case Reference List version are available to members, rather than the public.", "Appendix A.3 requires test reports to identify the tested hardware and software versions, test suite and system versions, and the test cases and outcomes." ], "limitations": "Process requirements, not a test report for any named device or venue. Version 5 has a version date of 21 April 2026; the HTML address can serve later revisions. Its test requirements must be read with the selected specifications and test package.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "efhoh-2026-procurement", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/efhoh-2026-procurement/", "title": "Telecoil and Auracast functionalities should be standard requirements for hearing aids and other hearing devices eligible for public health procurement", "authors": "European Federation of Hard of Hearing People (EFHOH)", "publisher": "EFHOH (position adopted by its members at the 2026 Annual General Meeting)", "date": "2026-04-18", "kind": "Position statement", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (European federation; EFHOH states that its 2024-2026 publications are co-funded by the EU CERV programme)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://efhoh.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/EFHOH-Motion-Telecoil-and-Auracast-functionalities.pdf", "summary": "A motion adopted by EFHOH's member organisations asking policymakers to require both telecoil and Auracast in publicly funded hearing aids and cochlear implants.", "findings": [ "Asks that public health procurement of hearing aids and cochlear implants require both telecoil and Auracast, so that users can reach hearing loop, FM/RF, infrared and Auracast systems.", "Reports that some hearing instrument makers have removed the telecoil, leaving users to change brand or buy accessories, and says this puts a burden on venues whose loop, RF and infrared systems depend on telecoil connection.", "Notes that needing an assistant device to select an Auracast stream adds complexity for hearing device users.", "Bases the position on Article 9 (accessibility) of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities." ], "limitations": "A policy position without data. It does not name the manufacturers or models it refers to.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "future-proofing", "finding-and-joining", "listener-reach", "telecoil-fitting", "infrared-limits", "loop-and-auracast", "cochlear-implants", "procurement" ] }, { "id": "bsi-2026-60118-17-draft", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bsi-2026-60118-17-draft/", "title": "26/30510231 DC: Draft BS EN IEC 60118-17 Electroacoustics - Hearing aids - Part 17: Audio broadcasting systems for hearing aids in the 2,4 GHz band", "authors": "British Standards Institution", "publisher": "BSI Knowledge", "date": "2026-04-17", "kind": "Draft standard (public catalogue)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (British Standards Institution)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/draft-bs-en-iec-60118-17-electroacoustics-hearing-aids-part-17-audio-broadcasting-systems-for-hearing-aids-in-the-2-4-ghz-band", "summary": "BSI dates a public-comment draft for the proposed 2.4 GHz hearing-aid broadcasting standard.", "findings": [ "The catalogue identifies draft 26/30510231 DC and gives 17 April 2026 as its publication date.", "Its title explicitly identifies the document as a draft of BS EN IEC 60118-17." ], "limitations": "Public catalogue only; the paid draft was not read. The catalogue label Current does not mean that a final international standard has been published. It does not establish an IEC stage code.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "bihima-2026-auracast-live-theatre", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bihima-2026-auracast-live-theatre/", "title": "How Auracast is changing access to live theatre", "authors": "BIHIMA", "publisher": "British Irish Hearing Instrument Manufacturers Association (BIHIMA)", "date": "2026-04-02", "kind": "Article (trade association feature on two theatres)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (BIHIMA, the association of hearing instrument manufacturers in the UK and Ireland; the feature quotes staff of two theatres using Ampetronic's Auri system and credits Ampetronic with guidance during funding and installation at one of them)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.bihima.com/how-auracast-is-changing-access-to-live-theatre/", "summary": "A hearing-instrument makers' association reports two UK theatres' experience of replacing or supplementing older assistive listening with an Auracast system.", "findings": [ "Reports that the Everyman Theatre in Cheltenham found its infrared system no longer fit for purpose: some parts were close to 20 years old, headsets regularly failed, coverage in the listed Victorian building was inconsistent, and under the dress circle the signal could drop out; a staff member says \"We were turning people away because we didn’t have enough working headsets\".", "Says that with Auracast, Everyman audiences can sit anywhere and need not book equipment in advance; patrons with Auracast-enabled hearing devices or smartphones connect directly, and the theatre lends simple handheld receivers to others.", "Says the Everyman launched the system with an accessibility open day and trained front-of-house staff to support users and troubleshoot basic problems; a charitable trust helped fund the upgrade, and Ampetronic, which makes the system, advised during funding and installation.", "Says the broadcast can take a feed straight from the sound desk as its own mix that prioritises voices, as Contact's production manager in Manchester describes. At Contact, BSL interpreters gave feedback, and early trials showed that device settings such as ambient microphones left on could affect clarity; a direct-feed-only mode made a marked difference.", "States that the latency is so low \"that lip-readers struggle to detect any delay at all\", without giving a figure, and reports an Everyman patron, deaf for many years, moved to tears by the clarity.", "Notes that not all hearing devices are Auracast-enabled yet and that the theatres' receivers fill the gap meanwhile; other venues have visited to trial the systems.", "The Everyman describes choosing its system after \"having conversations – with our audiences, and with organisations like Gloucestershire Deaf Association\", and links those conversations to problems with its old infrared system." ], "limitations": "Promotional feature by an association of hearing-aid makers, built on staff quotations and anecdotes, with no measurements, latency figures, user counts or costs. Its statement that Auri is the only Auracast-based assistive listening system currently available in the UK is the association's own; other records in this library describe a UK arts centre and a UK church using other Auracast equipment.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "listen-2026-st-mauritius-case-study", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2026-st-mauritius-case-study/", "title": "Two Solutions, One Goal: Audio for All. Hearing Loops and Auracast at St. Mauritius Church, Berg, Switzerland (case study UV00012-1)", "authors": "Ampetronic | Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2026-03-31", "kind": "Manufacturer case study", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic | Listen Technologies, which made both the loop driver and the Auracast transmitter described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/UV00012-1_CS_HoW_Catholic_Church_St_Mauritius_Switzerland_2026.pdf", "summary": "A maker's two-page account of a Swiss church that installed a hearing loop and an Auracast transmitter together as one assistive listening system.", "findings": [ "The RESULT section on PDF page 2 names muribaer sa as installer and describes coordination with the project lead and Ampetronic engineering support for commissioning, testing and documentation. It does not date the installation measurements or specify their instruments, grid or test signal.", "Describes a dual installation in a historic church: one Ampetronic C10-1N hearing loop driver for telecoil users and one Auri TX2N-D Auracast transmitter for Auracast hearing devices and receivers.", "States that the church wanted consistent speech clarity for telecoil users today and a path to Auracast for the future, integrated discreetly in a heritage building and designed for long-term reliability and simple maintenance.", "Reports that the installer measured and verified the loop for uniform magnetic field strength across the listening area, that the system was commissioned, tested and documented with the maker's support, and that the equipment was placed where it remains accessible for routine checks." ], "limitations": "The maker's own account of its products, with no measurement results, costs, user numbers or feedback from listeners. It does not say how the two systems share their audio feed. The date is taken from the document's version code (20260331); the file was created on 17 April 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "cqc-2026-accessible-information-standard", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cqc-2026-accessible-information-standard/", "title": "Meeting the Accessible Information Standard", "authors": "Care Quality Commission", "publisher": "Care Quality Commission (guidance for providers)", "date": "2026-03-10", "kind": "Regulator guidance page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Care Quality Commission, the regulator of health and adult social care services in England)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.cqc.org.uk/guidance-providers/meeting-accessible-information-standard", "summary": "England's health and social care regulator explains the NHS England Accessible Information Standard, which providers of NHS and publicly funded adult social care must have regard to, and how its assessments take the standard into account.", "findings": [ "Says the standard describes how NHS and adult social care services should identify, record, flag, share, meet and review people's information and communication needs, and that all organisations providing publicly funded NHS care or adult social care, and commissioners, must have regard to it.", "Says it applies to people with information or communication needs because of a disability, impairment or sensory loss, and to their carers and family members involved in their care who have such needs themselves.", "Under the step on meeting needs, gives as examples contact by email, text message or Text Relay, information in formats people can read, a communication professional such as a British Sign Language interpreter at appointments, and support from staff to communicate, which \"could include help to lip-read or use a hearing aid\".", "Says the sixth step, review, was added when the standard was reviewed and updated in 2025, and that services which do not need to follow the standard must still make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010.", "Says CQC considers how well services meet the standard under its responsive key question, by talking to people who use the service and to staff and, where possible, reviewing at least one person's care records. The standard is assured by commissioners, not by CQC, but CQC may take action if it finds that an organisation is not meeting accessible communication and information needs." ], "limitations": "A regulator's summary of NHS England's standard, not the standard itself; NHS England's pages for the standard refused automated access and could not be read. The page names no listening system and sets no technical requirement. The date is the page's \"last updated\" date.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "rtig-2026-accessible-information-grant-closed", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rtig-2026-accessible-information-grant-closed/", "title": "Accessible Information Grant Closed for Applications", "authors": "RTIG-Inform (page by timrivett)", "publisher": "RTIG-Inform", "date": "2026-03-04", "kind": "Programme application closure notice", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (RTIG-Inform, publisher of the Accessible Information Grant application notice)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://rtig.org.uk/news/accessible-information-grant-closed-applications", "summary": "RTIG reports that applications for the Accessible Information Grant have closed because demand exceeds available funding.", "findings": [ "The notice dated 4 March 2026 says sufficient applications had been received to more than fully commit the available grant and applications had therefore closed.", "RTIG states that it does not expect to reopen applications." ], "limitations": "Short closure notice with no award breakdown, technical eligibility detail or independent assessment. It establishes that applications had closed by 4 March 2026 but does not give the closure date. Applications exceeding available funding do not establish that all awards had been made. The statement about reopening is an expectation on 4 March 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "who-2026-hearing-loss", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/who-2026-hearing-loss/", "title": "Deafness and hearing loss", "authors": "World Health Organization", "publisher": "World Health Organization", "date": "2026-03-03", "kind": "Guidance (public health fact sheet)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (World Health Organization, a United Nations agency)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/deafness-and-hearing-loss", "summary": "Global hearing-loss estimates and definitions, including the strong relationship between age and disabling hearing loss.", "findings": [ "WHO estimates that over 5% of the world population, or 430 million people, require rehabilitation for disabling hearing loss.", "Defines disabling hearing loss as greater than 35 dB in the better hearing ear; over 25% of people older than 60 are affected.", "Distinguishes hearing loss generally, relative to thresholds of 20 dB or better in both ears, from the narrower disabling-hearing-loss category.", "Lists hearing aids, implants and hearing assistive technology among rehabilitation options, alongside communication training and services." ], "limitations": "A global fact sheet synthesising estimates, without a survey sample size or detailed estimation method on this page. It does not measure venue attendance, benefit from a particular venue system or receiver demand. The disabling-loss threshold omits milder and some unilateral losses.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "cen-2026-en-17210-revision", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cen-2026-en-17210-revision/", "title": "Accessibility of the built environment: Phase 2 of the revision of EN 17210:2021 has just started!", "authors": "CEN and CENELEC", "publisher": "CEN-CENELEC", "date": "2026-02-26", "kind": "Standards development update", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (CEN and CENELEC; the article states that the European Commission and EFTA funded Phase 1)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.cencenelec.eu/news-events/news/2026/en-in-the-spotlight/2026-02-26-en-17210-2021/", "summary": "The standards bodies report completion of the enquiry phase for the revision of the built-environment accessibility standard.", "findings": [ "The article is dated 26 February 2026. It says Phase 1, through the end of the enquiry stage, is complete and an advanced draft has been produced.", "It anticipates finishing drafting by the end of 2026 and publishing the European standard in autumn 2027.", "The revision seeks objectively verifiable requirements supporting the European Accessibility Act while retaining the functional approach of the main body." ], "limitations": "A progress announcement, not an adopted revised standard. It does not describe changes to hearing-system clauses. Its planned publication date is not a completed milestone or proof of citation in the Official Journal.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "judicial-college-2026-equal-treatment-bench-book", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/judicial-college-2026-equal-treatment-bench-book/", "title": "Equal Treatment Bench Book (July 2024 edition, February 2026 update): hearing loss and deafness", "authors": "Judicial College", "publisher": "Courts and Tribunals Judiciary (judiciary.uk)", "date": "2026-02-26", "kind": "Judicial guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Judicial College, which trains the judiciary of England and Wales)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Equal-Treatment-Bench-Book.pdf", "summary": "Guidance for judges in England and Wales on the fair treatment of people in courts and tribunals, with a section on adjustments for people with hearing loss.", "findings": [ "States that hearing rooms should be fitted with an induction loop, which should also be fitted in reception areas, and that a loop may help a deaf person hear better or lip-read with some background support.", "Before the hearing, advises checking the person's preferred way of communicating, choosing a quiet room with good lighting and checking that the induction loop is working.", "Notes that a witness may bring an aid the judge does not know, such as an external microphone that connects wirelessly to a hearing aid, and that the judge may need to ask how it works \"in the spirit of constructive dialogue\".", "Lists other adjustments: speech-to-text reporters, lip speakers, sign language interpreters, seating with good sight lines and light on speakers' faces, and extra breaks." ], "limitations": "Guidance for the judiciary, not a design standard: it names loops only and sets no performance requirements, and its prevalence figures come from Action on Hearing Loss. Dated from the judiciary's page announcing the February 2026 update.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-redeemer-profile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-redeemer-profile/", "title": "Auracast location profile: Redeemer Fellowship of Edisto Island", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (Auracast website)", "date": "2026-02-23", "kind": "Case study article (Bluetooth SIG location profile)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark; the transmitters are HomeSpot products)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-profile-redeemer-fellowship-of-edisto-island/", "summary": "A profile of a congregation in South Carolina that worships in a shared civic auditorium and set up Auracast itself, reporting that about half of its hearing-device users could receive the signal at first.", "findings": [ "Describes a congregation, many of them retired, that meets on Sundays in a civic centre auditorium shared with other community programmes, with no viable assistive listening system before; it says traditional systems were unavailable or impractical in a shared venue that could not take extensive infrastructure changes.", "Reports a do-it-yourself installation of a HomeSpot BA210 V2 transmitter, which the church's sound support lead found quick and intuitive after a recent change to a digital mixer.", "Quotes the sound support lead: \"only about half of congregants with hearing devices were immediately able to receive the Auracast™ signal\", while those who connected reported much clearer hearing and better comprehension.", "Says a second transmitter now serves exercise classes in the same auditorium during the week, and that the congregation is promoting Auracast to local facilities and public bodies." ], "limitations": "Promotional material from the trademark owner, based on the account of the congregation's sound support lead. It gives no numbers of users, does not say why about half could not receive the signal (for example, which devices or settings), and reports no measurements.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "jespersen-2026", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/jespersen-2026/", "title": "Sound quality comparison of Auracast and teleloop systems in a real-world environment", "authors": "Jespersen CT, Hashem R, Aranda de Toro MA, Fernández D", "publisher": "GN Hearing (ReSound) white paper M201742-26.02", "date": "2026-02-17", "kind": "Manufacturer study", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (GN Hearing)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/uploads/resound-jespersen/", "summary": "Single-blind comparison of Auracast and a hearing loop through the same hearing aids in a 16-person meeting room.", "findings": [ "18 listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss and 18 with normal hearing; ReSound Vivia hearing aids with power domes and the hearing-aid microphones switched off; an Ampetronic Auri transmitter and an Ampetronic perimeter loop, matched in loudness with a 1 kHz tone.", "Listeners with hearing loss preferred Auracast in 76% of trials and gave it a mean sound-quality rating of 7.9 versus 5.9 for the loop, on a 1 to 10 scale; listeners with normal hearing preferred Auracast in 99% of trials.", "Measured through the same hearing aid on a manikin, the telecoil path rolled off from about 300 Hz and was more than 10 dB below the Auracast path at 200 Hz and up to 40 dB below at 100 Hz. The authors link this to the high-pass filter commonly applied to telecoils to reduce hum.", "Its abstract says Auracast \"may therefore support more rapid, widespread adoption than teleloop systems\", and its conclusions speak of faster and wider proliferation of Auracast compared with loops.", "Methods, pages 3–4: the aids were fitted to individual hearing loss, power domes were selected to maximise bandwidth, and an audiologist used ReSound Smart 3D to switch between Auracast and teleloop while participants were unaware of the active technology. The study did not compare default and adjusted fittings, different microphone mixes or independent joining.", "Frequency response measurement (p. 4) used a separate baseline manikin measurement: the same hearing aid unit for both paths, fitted with 15 dB flat insertion gain. The listening participants were fitted to their individual hearing losses. Speech perception results (p. 6) explicitly describe subjective ratings rather than a test of measured speech understanding." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer-funded and run at the manufacturer's premises; one small room; one hearing aid model; hearing-aid microphones off, so room sound was not part of the test; subjective ratings rather than measured speech understanding.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "listener-preference", "telecoil-fitting", "auracast-hearing-aid-setup", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "moore-2026", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/moore-2026/", "title": "Hearing aids: what works well and what can be improved", "authors": "Moore BCJ", "publisher": "Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 27:123-135", "date": "2026-02-13", "kind": "Peer-reviewed review", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (University of Cambridge; UK research council grant)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10162-026-01031-5", "summary": "A review of current hearing-aid performance, drawing on research and the author's experience as a hearing-aid user, including fitting type and wireless streaming.", "findings": [ "With an open fitting, sound passing through the vent mixes with the hearing aid's delayed output, causing comb filtering heard as coloration; with a 5 ms delay, response peaks fall at multiples of 200 Hz.", "Streamed sound can sound \"tinny\" with an open fitting because low frequencies leak out, and room sound leaking in through the vent reduces the clarity of what is streamed.", "Describes Auracast as letting a device broadcast to an unlimited number of nearby receivers, including hearing aids, without pairing, for TVs and public-address systems in places such as airports, stations and lecture halls.", "The author rates current hearing-aid wireless connectivity 10/10 with a closed fitting and 7/10 with an open fitting.", "The Styles of Hearing Aids and Open Versus Closed Fittings section explains that a closed fitting can make the user’s own voice too loud or boomy through the occlusion effect. It describes the trade-off with vented fittings, which let external sound in and low-frequency hearing aid output out." ], "limitations": "A narrative review that includes the author's personal ratings; no new data on Auracast.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "which-technology", "wifi-latency", "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "fcc-95-lprs", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/fcc-95-lprs/", "title": "47 CFR Part 95, Subpart G: Low Power Radio Service (216-217 MHz)", "authors": "US Federal Communications Commission", "publisher": "Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR)", "date": "2026-02-10", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Federal Communications Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/part-95/subpart-G", "summary": "The US rules for the Low Power Radio Service at 216-217 MHz, the band used by newer venue FM assistive listening systems, which it shares with other uses.", "findings": [ "Defines the service as short-distance voice and data communication for auditory assistance to people with disabilities and others, health care communications, law enforcement tracking and certain other purposes.", "Permits auditory assistance uses including assistive listening devices, audio description for the blind and simultaneous language translation, for people with disabilities, people who need translation, and others in educational settings.", "Lists 40 standard, 20 extra and 200 narrowband channels between 216 and 217 MHz, of which channels 19, 20, 50 and 151-160 (centre frequencies from 216.4525 to 216.4975 MHz) are available exclusively for law enforcement tracking; maritime AMTS transmissions are limited to 216.750-217.000 MHz, used as a single 250 kHz channel for network control.", "Limits the effective radiated power of LPRS transmitters to 100 mW (1 W for those used with maritime AMTS stations) and prohibits two-way voice communication.", "Requires that LPRS stations cause no harmful interference to the US Air Force Space Surveillance system at 216.88-217.08 MHz or to reception of channel 13 TV and digital TV stations within their service contour.", "Sets no antenna height limit for units with an integral antenna or operating entirely inside a building; other antennas may not rise more than 30.5 m (100 ft) above ground.", "Says no FCC licence is needed to operate these transmitters, except for maritime AMTS use; each device must carry a label saying it may not interfere with TV reception or Federal Government radar, and makers of auditory assistance transmitters must also supply a statement that the transmitter must not cause harmful interference to TV reception or to the US Air Force Space Surveillance System in the 216.88-217.08 MHz band." ], "limitations": "Transmitter rules only: nothing on audio quality, coverage or receivers. The band is shared with health care, law enforcement tracking and maritime uses. Date is the subpart's latest amendment shown by eCFR (10 February 2026); most sections summarised here date from the 2017 reorganisation of Part 95, and the antenna section was amended in 2024. Text read as current to 6 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "hhtm-2026-marriott-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hhtm-2026-marriott-auracast/", "title": "Auracast at Marriott Theatre — Audience Reactions and a Behind the Scenes Look", "authors": "HHTM; Andrew Bellavia (host)", "publisher": "Hearing Health & Technology Matters, This Week in Hearing", "date": "2026-02-08", "kind": "Venue launch interviews (article and written episode transcript)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (HHTM editorial interview coverage; the launch audience was invited by manufacturer GN ReSound, and host Andrew Bellavia runs a hearables marketing consultancy; no episode funding statement is given)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://hearinghealthmatters.org/thisweek/2026/auracast-marriott-reactions/", "summary": "Interviews at Marriott Theatre describe adding Auracast while retaining a long-established loop, with staff reporting coverage beyond the auditorium.", "findings": [ "In the launch transcript, the host describes retaining the loop while adding Auracast; the theatre representative (speaker 5) estimates that the loop had been in use for over a decade.", "A theatre technician says a patron’s question prompted an initial trial, followed by a Listen Technologies transmitter; the technician reports one transmitter serving the theatre, both lobbies, entryway, minibar and box office, and partway toward the restrooms.", "The technician (speaker 7) describes discussing an improved setup with the host after the host contacted the theatre; the host acknowledges that contact in the transcript.", "GN ReSound invited a few dozen hearing-aid users plus companions or guests to experience the system; the article includes favourable audience interviews about speech and music.", "The host says the system had been running for two or three weeks before the formal launch; the technician (speaker 7) replies that no patrons had yet approached with feedback." ], "limitations": "The full public article and written transcript were read; the video was not viewed. An invited launch audience and selected interviews, without a participant total, systematic comparison, speech scores, coverage measurements or relative loop/Auracast delay. Coverage is a technician’s account. The article publication date does not establish the exact installation or launch date. The transcript identifies most interviewees only by speaker number.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "lamacchia-2026-audioxpress-testing", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/lamacchia-2026-audioxpress-testing/", "title": "Evaluating and testing Bluetooth LE Audio performance: a guide for developers, part 3", "authors": "LaMacchia B (Cloud2GND)", "publisher": "audioXpress (print issue February 2026; online 21 April 2026)", "date": "2026-02-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Trade article (bench test)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Manufacturer (Cloud2GND, maker of the AW100 broadcaster used; HEAD acoustics provided access to test equipment and materials)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://audioxpress.com/article/evaluating-and-testing-bluetooth-le-audio-performance-a-guide-for-developers-part-3", "summary": "Bench tests of consumer Auracast receivers with a reference broadcaster and audio analysers, and how packet loss concealment and buffering affect measurements.", "findings": [ "Out of the box, Nordic's nRF5340 Audio Development Kit example software did not work with any of the consumer devices tested, while the Cloud2GND AW100 broadcaster connected to the purchased Auracast receivers.", "In Testing Devices with AW100 (Figures 19-21), one tested HomeSpot BA310 receiver's output produced an audible glitch about once every 15 minutes during a long sine-tone test. The author suspects the receiver after prior broadcaster testing, but also identifies the test PC as a possible, though unlikely, cause. The article recommends automated capture for faults that recur over days or weeks.", "Because of LE Audio buffering, a fault may occur up to 60 ms before it shows at the output. Concealment can cover short gaps such as one 10 ms frame; the author suggests muting once roughly 50 to 100 ms of audio is lost.", "The same receiver's full-scale analogue output was only 100 mV, limiting its THD+N to the mid-70s dB.", "Reference 20 states that HEAD acoustics and Jay Pliskow provided access to equipment and testing materials; it does not specify a loan arrangement.", "Testing Devices with AW100 describes reviewing target-software traces, a Bluetooth packet inspector and other test-device records after an audio analyser flags a glitch. Bluetooth-Specific Audio Test Equipment says LE Audio, LC3 and Auracast support is evolving and asks users to check that available features meet the intended test needs." ], "limitations": "Consumer devices on a bench rather than venue equipment in a room, with few numeric results and no stated total receiver sample or representative venue-device sample. The author's company makes the reference broadcaster.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "commissioning-tests", "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "frankfurt-uas-2026-auracast-gates", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/frankfurt-uas-2026-auracast-gates/", "title": "Testbetrieb für Gate-Durchsagen direkt ins Ohr am Flughafen Frankfurt gestartet (Trial of gate announcements straight to the ear started at Frankfurt Airport)", "authors": "Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences", "publisher": "Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences (Frankfurt UAS news)", "date": "2026-01-30", "kind": "Press release (university, trial announcement)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Government (the project 'Barrierefreie digitale Passagieransagen' is funded by the Hessian Ministry for Digitalisation and Innovation with about EUR 245,500 from its Distr@l programme; it is led by Sittig Technologies, a company specialising in automated announcements, together with Frankfurt UAS; Fraport, the airport operator, takes part, and GN, Google, Samsung and the Bluetooth SIG are named as supporting technology companies)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.frankfurt-university.de/de/news/n-frankfurt-uas-aktuelles/testbetrieb-fuer-gate-durchsagen-direkt-ins-ohr-am-flughafen-frankfurt-gestartet", "summary": "A university's announcement of a two-month trial at Frankfurt Airport sending gate announcements by Auracast to hearing aids, headphones and phones, with an evaluation planned but no results given.", "findings": [ "Says Frankfurt Airport began testing Auracast for gate announcements, as the first airport worldwide according to Fraport's announcement of 28 January 2026, at gates A16 and A17 in Terminal 1.", "The project team planned to collect feedback from travellers and staff for two months to assess the effect on accessibility, comfort and the passenger experience.", "Says the university's telecommunications networks research group accompanies the trial with quantifiable measurements, including the Mean Opinion Score, a standard telecommunications measure of perceived speech quality.", "Describes the solution as also supporting a 'silent airport' concept that reduces noise in the terminal.", "Gives no results, user numbers, coverage or latency figures." ], "limitations": "An announcement at the start of the trial. No results had been published by 9 October 2026 that could be found. The lead company specialises in automated announcements, and the supporting technology companies include a hearing aid maker, two phone makers and the Bluetooth SIG. Read in German; the translation is ours.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-saedalen-profile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-saedalen-profile/", "title": "Auracast location profile: Sædalen Church", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (Auracast website)", "date": "2026-01-29", "kind": "Case study article (Bluetooth SIG location profile)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark; the transmitters are from Ampetronic | Listen Technologies)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-profile-saedalen-church/", "summary": "A profile of a new Church of Norway building near Bergen where a hearing loop could not be installed and Auracast became the assistive listening system.", "findings": [ "Says that when the new building opened, installing a traditional induction loop was impossible because of the building's design, and that the church had no assistive listening system for its first months because compatible Auracast equipment was not yet widely available.", "States that Norway's standard NS 8179:2023, on acoustic conditions and audio engineering solutions for universal design in buildings, defines Auracast as an approved solution.", "Describes two Auri TX2N transmitters and four receivers, installed by the church itself: one transmitter fixed to the main audio processor serving the sanctuary and the lobby café, the other on a mobile system for upstairs conference rooms.", "Quotes the volunteer head of audio, video and lighting: installation needed minimal maintenance and no onboarding beyond telling visitors, and \"Volunteers appreciate the simplicity; there's no weekly setup or complex troubleshooting\". Feedback from users has been scarce, which the team reads as a sign of ease of use.", "Claims lower latency and more reliable coverage than Wi-Fi-based alternatives, without figures, and reports that the Church of Norway's building manager has recommended Auracast to other churches in Bergen." ], "limitations": "Promotional material from the trademark owner, based on a volunteer's account. No measurements, user numbers or listener feedback; it does not say why a loop was impossible. The statement about NS 8179:2023 is the profile's and was not checked against the standard.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "starkey-2026-auracast-assistant", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/starkey-2026-auracast-assistant/", "title": "Starkey Expands Omega AI Connectivity With Auracast Assistant, Google Fast Pair and Industry-First Push to Talk", "authors": "Starkey", "publisher": "Starkey press release", "date": "2026-01-28", "kind": "Press release", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Manufacturer (Starkey)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.starkey.com/press/press-releases/2026/01/starkey-expands-omega-ai-connectivity", "summary": "Starkey's announcement of an Auracast assistant in the My Starkey app for its Omega AI and Edge AI hearing aids.", "findings": [ "States that with the new assistant any smartphone running the My Starkey app can tune Omega AI and Edge AI hearing aids to an Auracast broadcast, start and stop it, adjust the stream and hearing aid microphone volumes, and choose a different language stream.", "Names airports, gyms, houses of worship, theatres and event venues as intended uses.", "Google Fast Pair was added at the same time; it covers pairing the hearing aids to an Android phone, not joining broadcasts." ], "limitations": "A press release. It does not say how broadcasts are found (list or QR code), which app or phone software versions are needed, or when the update reached each market.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "finding-and-joining" ] }, { "id": "fcc-2026-hearing-aid-compatible-handsets", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/fcc-2026-hearing-aid-compatible-handsets/", "title": "47 CFR 20.19: hearing loss compatible wireless handsets", "authors": "US Federal Communications Commission", "publisher": "eCFR", "date": "2026-01-26", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Federal Communications Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/section-20.19", "summary": "The US rule on mobile phones and hearing aids, which from 14 December 2026 lets Bluetooth coupling stand in for telecoil coupling on some handsets and later requires that Bluetooth link to be non-proprietary.", "findings": [ "Defines Bluetooth coupling as a form of hearing aid compatibility in which the handset connects to hearing aids by short-range wireless technology using chipsets and antennas inside the handset.", "Handset models submitted for FCC approval from 14 December 2026 must meet acoustic coupling and volume control requirements, plus either telecoil coupling or Bluetooth coupling as a replacement for or in addition to it.", "After 14 December 2026 all of a manufacturer's handset models must meet acoustic coupling, at least 85% must meet telecoil coupling and at least 15% must have Bluetooth coupling, and every model must offer at least two forms of coupling.", "Until 13 December 2028 the Bluetooth coupling may be proprietary; from then it must be a standalone non-proprietary implementation of a global low-power wireless standard for high-quality audio voice streaming, be qualified against the specifications it claims, and give full interoperability between hearing aids and handsets.", "Package labels and manufacturer websites must say whether each model meets telecoil or Bluetooth coupling requirements and which Bluetooth coupling standard it includes." ], "limitations": "Covers phone calls on mobile handsets, not assistive listening broadcasts in venues. The rule names no particular Bluetooth standard and does not mention LE Audio or Auracast. Date is the section's latest amendment shown by eCFR.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "future-proofing" ] }, { "id": "canada-2026-eaf-call", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/canada-2026-eaf-call/", "title": "Enabling Accessibility Fund – 2026 Call for Proposals: What this program offers", "authors": "Employment and Social Development Canada", "publisher": "Government of Canada", "date": "2026-01-16", "kind": "Guidance (government grant call overview)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Employment and Social Development Canada)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/funding/enabling-accessibility-fund-contribution/overview.html", "summary": "Canada’s 2026 EAF overview describes a large-project call focused on workplace access and Indigenous community access, including technology-related barriers.", "findings": [ "The call describes up to C$12 million total, with requests between C$500,000 and C$1 million and a maximum duration of 24 months; C$10 million is allocated to workplace access and C$2 million to Indigenous workplace or community access.", "Workplace projects target places where people with disabilities are currently employed. Only Indigenous organisations are eligible for community accessibility projects under this particular process.", "The glossary lists accessibility-specific equipment and information and communication technology as non-flat-rate activities. Its audio example is described as a “Frequency Modulation (FM) loop system”; this wording does not clearly distinguish RF/FM systems from induction loops.", "The overview says all 2026 EAF projects are exempt from applicant contributions towards eligible costs, while ineligible costs such as underlying general construction remain the applicant’s responsibility." ], "limitations": "Read through the Wayback Machine capture of 26 March 2026 because the live page could not be fetched directly. Date is the page-details date, 16 January 2026. Only the overview and glossary were read; linked full eligibility, application instructions and cost sheets were not obtained. The overview does not give a closing date and cannot establish the application window on 13 October 2026. Technology is tagged Shared because its FM/loop terminology is ambiguous.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "listen-2026-listenwifi-system-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2026-listenwifi-system-manual/", "title": "ListenWIFI System Manual", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2026-01-15", "kind": "Manufacturer user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the ListenWIFI system described, which also sells RF/FM, infrared, hearing loop and Auracast assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/ListenWIFI-System-Manual-2026.01.15-V5.pdf", "summary": "Listen Technologies' 58-page manual for its ListenWIFI system: servers that stream venue audio over Wi-Fi to an app on listeners' phones and to the maker's LWR-1050 Wi-Fi receivers.", "findings": [ "Describes the servers as distributing \"real-time low-latency audio\" to mobile apps and dedicated receivers, up to 500 listeners per server.", "Recommends wired headphones, or an induction neckloop for hearing aids with a telecoil, for both the app and the receivers. It advises wired headphones \"to ensure low audio delay when lip sync is important\" and says Bluetooth devices are \"not recommended due to the significant latency that it can introduce\".", "Lets the installer add up to 3 seconds of delay to each input, in 20 ms steps, to align the stream with other sources such as ambient sound, loudspeakers and video displays.", "Marks the audio packets for priority with quality of service (a DSCP/ToS value of 0xB8 by default, with Voice or Video VLAN priority) so that they cross the network as quickly as possible for low latency, and says some experimentation may be needed to find the best setting for a network.", "Functional Testing (printed pages 11-12) asks installers to check both the smartphone app and LWR-1050 receiver: verify Wi-Fi and server connections, check displayed channels or the ready screen, access channels manually or through configured beacon zones, and assess audio quality and delay. It gives no numeric delay criterion or measurement method for this check.", "Printed page 15, PA Channel, allows one PA channel per venue across all servers. Audio on its associated input temporarily overrides other listening channels, then listeners return to their previous channel; the manual identifies emergency override as a use. Printed pages 9 and 41 also describe this setting.", "The system installation instructions require servers connected to power and the local network. The manual documents an audio-priority feature, but supplies no fire-alarm assessment or power-failure test of the complete listening path.", "How ListenWIFI Works (printed page 3) describes streaming to wireless devices attached to the venue Wi-Fi network, and System Set-up (printed page 7) requires server power and a local network connection. The PA Channel description on printed page 15 concerns listeners already using listening channels; it gives no procedure for delivering an emergency announcement to a phone outside the system." ], "limitations": "A maker's manual with no measurements: it gives no latency figure and no way to measure one. The date comes from the file name and the PDF's creation date (15 January 2026, version 5); the PDF's metadata marks it as a draft. The input delay can only make the stream later, so it helps where the stream arrives before the room sound or the picture, not after.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency", "neckloops", "emergency-announcements", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "nyc-mopd-2026-als-list", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nyc-mopd-2026-als-list/", "title": "NYC Locations with Assistive Listening Systems (Assistive Listening Systems List)", "authors": "New York City Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities", "publisher": "City of New York (nyc.gov)", "date": "2026-01-02", "kind": "Regulatory report (list of city facilities with assistive listening systems, published under Local Law 51 of 2017)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (New York City Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities; the data are self-reported by city agencies)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.nyc.gov/site/mopd/laws/nyc-locations-with-assistive-listening-systems.page", "summary": "New York City's annually updated list of assistive listening systems in city facilities, giving each room's system type, status and, for some, the cost reported by the agency.", "findings": [ "Lists 1,401 rooms or desks in facilities of 34 city agencies, all reported in 2025. Of these, 1,144 are in Department of Education schools: 996 with FM (912 installed) and 148 with loops (37 installed, the rest in design, bidding or construction), the loops mostly in cafeterias (66) and at security desks (63).", "Outside the schools, its 257 entries are mostly loops of various kinds (152, including counter, desktop and portable loops), then FM or other radio systems (50), infrared (43), combinations (10) and two others.", "Gives a price in 366 entries: 365 plain numeric cost cells and one per-room amount. In ald-list.csv, data row 1391 (header excluded) lists $11,287 each for Hearing Rooms 1-18 at the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings, 260 East 161st Street, 6th Floor, Bronx; it labels the system Induction Loop, status Installed and installation March-20. The remaining 1,035 cost cells are 953 blank, 67 Included Above and 15 TBD. Reported costs for entries labelled induction loop range from $300 to $241,117; the highest are school cafeteria loops in design or construction, such as $241,117 and $150,000, and a school auditorium loop at $163,000.", "Other reported costs range from $313 to $10,100 for entries labelled counter loop, $1,200 to $120,000 for school FM entries (the highest a gymnasium under construction), $1,259 to $26,850 for FM systems elsewhere, and $144 to $22,000 for entries labelled infrared system.", "Its loop entries give installation dates from 2018 to 2025.", "In ald-list.csv, restricting non-school rows to the exact label FM System gives $1,892 to $26,850; including FM System (NADY ALD-800) adds the Law Department room 2-160 entry at $1,259.", "Among the 366 price-bearing data rows, the status counts are 149 Installed, 91 In Construction, 72 In Design, 52 Under Construction and two Bid & Award. Every row's Year Reported is 2025; Date Installed is a separate field. Neither field identifies a price year, and an Installed status does not identify a paid invoice.", "The priced school entries identify rooms including auditoria, cafeterias, gymnasia, security desks, multipurpose rooms, dance studios and a playroom. Their system labels are FM or Induction Loop, without equipment specifications; the FM label alone does not establish a dedicated venue receiver design. The file also has prices for mixed FM/loop systems and a Law Department entry with its system marked TBD. Shared-cost markers and repeated room entries do not establish financially independent project totals." ], "limitations": "Self-reported by agencies, with no statement of what each cost covers (equipment, design, installation, building work, receivers), so costs are not comparable between entries; many entries have no cost, and installation dates, where given, run from 2015 to 2026. The counts above were made from the list's downloadable data file (ald-list.csv) as read on 9 October 2026; the page states it was last updated on 2 January 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "starkey-2026-auracast-quicktip", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/starkey-2026-auracast-quicktip/", "title": "Auracast Assistant: QuickTIP", "authors": "Starkey", "publisher": "Starkey Laboratories, FLYR4546-00-EN-ST", "date": "2026-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer user guide", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Starkey)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://cdn.mediavalet.com/usil/starkeyhearingtech/ZrMv5J2LG0GLYUt4jl0qQQ/zFt3mab1DE-z6vDSS9-lBQ/Original/Auracast%20Assistant%20QuickTip.pdf", "summary": "A one-page manufacturer guide shows broadcast selection and separate controls for streamed audio and hearing aid microphones.", "findings": [ "Users select Stream options, search for Auracast broadcasts and choose a broadcast. The guide separates supported broadcasts from those that do not support hearing aid streaming.", "The streaming-screen illustration near step 8 shows separate sliders labelled Streaming volume and Hearing aid mic.", "The guide describes stopping and restarting a stream, changing language where offered, and disconnecting. It says leaving range disconnects the broadcast automatically.", "The footnote limits availability to selected hearing aids without listing models. The footer is dated 01/26.", "Steps 1–3 take the listener from Stream options to an Auracast broadcast list. The screenshots show a separate Programs control, but the joining instructions do not ask the listener to create an ordinary listening programme." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer instructions and screenshots, not a user trial. No hearing aid firmware or app version is stated, and no default microphone balance or fitting target is supplied.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "bettear-2026-caster-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bettear-2026-caster-manual/", "title": "Bettear CASTER user manual (firmware 1.0.8)", "authors": "Bettear", "publisher": "Bettear; copy hosted by the distributor Univox", "date": "2026-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Bettear)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://univox.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/01/B-CASTER-User-Manual-1.0.8.pdf", "summary": "User manual for the B-CASTER Auracast transmitter: broadcast modes, audio quality settings, transmit power and specifications.", "findings": [ "Lists two hardware variants by maximum transmit power, B-CASTER-10 at 10 dBm and B-CASTER-20 at 20 dBm, with power adjustable in the management panel; it says users are solely responsible for meeting local regulations.", "Gives three quality settings: Low (16 kHz, 32 kbps) and Medium (24 kHz, 48 kbps), marked as supported by hearing aids and cochlear implants, and High (48 kHz, 96 kbps), marked as not supported by them.", "States latency under 40 ms and offers AGC, high-pass filters (80, 120 or 250 Hz) and low-pass filters (8, 12 or 16 kHz); the high-pass filter is not available at 48 kHz.", "In Extender mode a unit rebroadcasts a master unit's audio received over Ethernet, by default with the master's broadcast settings, which the manual says lets users move between broadcasters.", "At this firmware the second LAN port (with PoE out) is enabled only on CASTER-S licensed units, and dual-mono broadcast appears in the interface but is not yet active." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer documentation for one firmware version. It gives no range, coverage or test data, and does not say which receiver the latency figure applies to.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "device-compatibility", "large-venues", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "hlaa-2026-coupling-options", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hlaa-2026-coupling-options/", "title": "Coupling Options: Ways to Connect to Assistive Listening System Audio", "authors": "Kaneb A (credited on the chart)", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America (HLAA)", "date": "2026-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Hearing Loss Association of America, a US consumer organisation for people with hearing loss; the chart is credited to Andrea Kaneb and names no funder)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/advocacy-resources/hlaa-coupling-options-als-chart.pdf", "summary": "A one-page HLAA chart of the ways listeners can connect to hearing loop, Auracast, FM, infrared and audio-over-Wi-Fi systems.", "findings": [ "Maps five venue systems (hearing loop, Auracast broadcast, FM, infrared and audio over Wi-Fi) against six ways of listening: a built-in telecoil, built-in Auracast, a receiver with a neckloop, a receiver with a streamer, a receiver with headphones or earbuds, and a phone (app or Wi-Fi).", "Shows a built-in telecoil receiving only the hearing loop, and built-in Auracast receiving only the Auracast broadcast.", "Shows FM and infrared reached only through a receiver (with a neckloop, a streamer, or headphones or earbuds), and a hearing loop through a receiver with a streamer or with headphones or earbuds.", "Shows Auracast and audio over Wi-Fi reachable through every receiver option and through a phone.", "Notes that audio over Wi-Fi and streamers add latency that may prove challenging in some situations, and that hearing aids or cochlear implants must have a telecoil to receive a hearing loop or a neckloop connected to a receiver." ], "limitations": "A summary chart with no measurements or references: it shows which routes exist, not how well they work or which device models support them. It does not separate Auracast Ready from Auracast Enabled devices or deal with receivers from different makers. No date is printed; the year comes from the PDF's creation date (28 July 2026).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "telecoil-fitting", "wifi-latency", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "loop-and-auracast", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "hlaa-2026-best-listening-experience", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hlaa-2026-best-listening-experience/", "title": "How to Get the Best Assistive Listening Experience", "authors": "Hearing Loss Association of America (HLAA)", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America (HLAA)", "date": "2026-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Advocacy resource (checklist for listeners)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Hearing Loss Association of America, a US consumer organisation for people with hearing loss; the PDF's metadata names Linda Kozma-Spytek as its author)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/advocacy-resources/How-to-Get-the-Best-Assistive-Listening-Experience-HLAA.pdf", "summary": "A two-page HLAA checklist telling listeners how to prepare for, check and give feedback on assistive listening at a venue, including venue-provided receivers and neckloops.", "findings": [ "Asks listeners to find out beforehand which assistive listening systems their hearing devices can connect to, which settings or other devices they need, and how to troubleshoot them, asking their audiologist if unsure.", "Before going, advises checking whether and what type of assistive listening is available, and bringing what they may need, such as charged hearing devices and phone, a personal neckloop, a personal headset or a cable for a streamer.", "On arrival, advises looking for signs or asking staff, checking that the system works at the place where equipment is collected if the venue provides audio there (step 3), and making sure the controls of venue equipment are easy to reach and adjust.", "If something is not working, advises asking staff for help, adjusting the volume, reconnecting, trying a different receiver, neckloop or headset, and moving seats, while noting that listeners \"should not have to search for appropriate seating\".", "Asks listeners to judge whether voices are clear and steady and whether the equipment was comfortable enough to use again, and to give feedback through HLAA's feedback form." ], "limitations": "A checklist without data or references. No date is printed; the year comes from the PDF's creation date (30 July 2026).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2026-infinium-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2026-infinium-manual/", "title": "Infinium system controller and transmitter user manual (MAN 297B)", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV", "date": "2026-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer installation manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/MAN-297B-Infinium-Controller-Transmitter-BA-CT1.pdf", "summary": "Installation and configuration manual for the Infinium BA CT1 Auracast controller and BA T1 transmitter, with placement guidance and specifications.", "findings": [ "States a range of up to 100 m (328 ft) in open spaces with the maker's BA R1 receiver, and system latency under 40 ms with that receiver; other receivers may vary.", "Advises mounting transmitters high so the signal does not pass through bodies, centrally in the space, and not close to Wi-Fi access points or other 2.4 GHz devices; it suggests checking for 2.4 GHz interference with an RF scanning tool first.", "Lists Wi-Fi, communication systems, large crowds and building materials (steel, concrete, metallised glass, lift shafts) as factors, and says coverage in a full space will likely differ from an empty one, so coverage should be checked with an audience present where feasible.", "Advises reducing transmit power when many transmitters on different channels share a building, and a lower sample rate in high-interference environments to help avoid dropouts. It notes that hearing aids typically do not support 48 kHz.", "Transmitters can be linked into arrays that share the same broadcast channels, so the maker's receivers move between transmitters by signal strength.", "Under Mounting Tips (printed page 15), the manual says large areas may need several transmitters. Its Transmitter Arrays section (pages 26-27) describes BA R1 receivers moving between array transmitters by signal strength; it does not document this behaviour for hearing aids or phones.", "The controller description and Broadcast Configuration section specify either two independent mono programmes or one stereo programme. Dual mono gives the receiver two choices; stereo uses both channels for one selectable programme." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer guidance without test data. The range figure is for open space with the maker's own receiver, and the specifications list transmit power as programmable without giving its maximum. Revision MAN 297B, copyright 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "real-range", "device-compatibility", "large-venues", "interference", "commissioning-tests", "rf-fm-bands", "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "nrc-2025-nbc-assistive-listening", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nrc-2025-nbc-assistive-listening/", "title": "National Building Code of Canada 2025: assistive listening systems (Articles 3.8.2.9 and 3.8.3.19, Note A-3.8.3.19)", "authors": "Canadian Board for Harmonized Construction Codes", "publisher": "National Research Council Canada", "date": "2025-12-22", "kind": "Building code", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (National Research Council Canada)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.4224/26fz-gg26", "summary": "Canada's model building code requirements for assistive listening in assembly buildings and at service counters, with an explanatory note that leaves room for technologies other than FM, infrared and loops.", "findings": [ "In buildings of assembly occupancy, classrooms, auditoria, meeting rooms and theatres larger than 100 m² must have an assistive listening system, and it must encompass the entire seating area.", "At each location where the public is served at counters in assembly buildings, at least one counter needs an assistive listening system or adaptive technology, plus an amplification system where a barrier such as a glass screen is present; the system must allow the clear communication the exchange needs.", "Note A-3.8.3.19 gives FM, infrared and induction loops as examples, says the technology is advancing rapidly so other types \"could be considered\", and lists cost, maintenance, suitability for the audience, ease of operation and privacy as selection factors.", "Signs must show where assistive listening systems are, using the International Symbol of Access or the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss with information that makes the type of facility clear.", "Sets no receiver count, no hearing-aid-compatible share and no performance figures. Designers may instead follow the listed provisions of CSA B651-18 in their entirety (Clause 6.6 for communication)." ], "limitations": "A model code that provinces and territories adopt and amend on their own timetables, so the code in force may differ. The NBC states that its Notes are explanatory and not requirements. Does not mention Bluetooth or Auracast.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "commissioning-tests", "service-counters", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "courts-and-chambers", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-2025-bristol-interview", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-2025-bristol-interview/", "title": "Auracast in Action: Exploring Hearing Accessibility in a Busy Railway Station (This Week in Hearing)", "authors": "Hoskin J (Ampetronic)", "publisher": "Hearing Health & Technology Matters", "date": "2025-12-17", "kind": "Manufacturer interview (video tour and transcript)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Jonathan Hoskin, business development manager in Ampetronic's specialist solutions team, describes the Auracast system Ampetronic installed at Bristol Temple Meads under Connected Places Catapult's Station Innovation programme; published as an editorial episode of Hearing Health & Technology Matters' This Week in Hearing)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://hearinghealthmatters.org/thisweek/2025/hearing-accessibility-auracast/", "summary": "A video tour and interview in which the maker that installed Auracast transmitters at Bristol Temple Meads station describes the installation, the station's existing loops, reactions from users and what still needs work.", "findings": [ "Says the station, a Grade I listed building, had assistive listening only as induction loops for one-to-one conversation at the reception counters and some help points, with no large-area system for public address announcements, because loop cable is hard to integrate into the listed building.", "Describes transmitters in the ticket hall, on platform 3, three in the subway and several along the curved platforms 9 to 11 (well over 200 m), placed from a site survey and the maker's propagation simulation, powered over Ethernet, and checked with received signal strength readings from the maker's own receivers; the interviewee says two transmitters covered a stretch of platform that a loop would need about four amplifiers and much cable to cover.", "The trial was installed in July 2025 for the summer and, the interviewee says, was kept in place at the request of Connected Places Catapult because stakeholders received it well.", "Says RNID ran formal research including digit triplet testing, in which \"the majority of the participants showed a measurable intelligibility gain\" through Auracast compared with the public address alone; no figures are given.", "Says stakeholders at the trial's experience days named NFC tap-on \"far and away the preferred method\" to join a broadcast in transport, because passengers already tap on to pay fares; QR codes had been the first joining method considered.", "The programme's host says issues remain, such as all receiving devices switching seamlessly between transmitters while walking and a priority system for listening to other audio between announcements; the interviewee says the standard needs further development for transport.", "The interviewee expects a hybrid of both technologies for the next few years, saying telecoil users are likely to find a loop the simplest option at ticket windows and Auracast the option for moving around the station.", "Says that in the Grade I listed station \"it's almost impossible for us to, to do any of that invasive engineering\" that loops would need." ], "limitations": "The maker describing its own installation; the coverage claims, the loop comparison and the cost remarks come with no published measurements. The RNID testing described was not found in RNID's published report on its March 2026 test, which describes a qualitative concept test with ten participants. A transcript of a recorded video conversation.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "titanji-2025", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/titanji-2025/", "title": "Real-world Speech Communication Experiences of Cochlear Implant Users", "authors": "Titanji BN, Moberly AC, Tamati TN", "publisher": "Otology & Neurotology Open 5(4)", "date": "2025-12-17", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (questionnaire)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Meharry Medical College and Vanderbilt University Medical Center; the article declares no funding sources, while Europe PMC links it to NIDCD grant R21 DC019382; one author declares roles with Otologic Technologies and paid consulting for Amgen)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12737855/", "summary": "Asked adult cochlear implant users and age-matched normal-hearing adults how hard they find communication in 12 everyday settings, including concerts, cinemas, places of worship and lectures.", "findings": [ "Thirty-seven postlingually deafened adult implant users (8 unilateral, 17 bimodal, 11 bilateral, 1 not known) and 19 normal-hearing adults of similar age completed the 12-item Personal Assessment of Communication Abilities, rating difficulty from 1 (none) to 5 (very much).", "Implant users reported significantly more difficulty than the normal-hearing adults in all 12 settings.", "Implant users rated conversation in large groups hardest (mean 4.03), followed by concerts and movie theatres (3.77) and restaurants or cafés (3.75); the normal-hearing adults rated concerts and movie theatres 2.37.", "Places of worship and lectures were rated 3.11 by implant users and 1.41 by normal-hearing adults; one-to-one conversation was the easiest setting for implant users (1.74)." ], "limitations": "Self-report from a small sample at one academic centre, recruited from earlier research participants. The questionnaire does not ask about assistive listening, so it shows where implant users struggle, not what helps. The authors note possible under-reporting by experienced users and unmatched lifestyles between the groups.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "listen-2025-hlaa-webinar-qa", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2025-hlaa-webinar-qa/", "title": "Better Together: Auracast & Hearing Loops. Understanding the Future of Assistive Listening (questions not answered during the webinar)", "authors": "Ampetronic | Listen Technologies (webinar presenters Kevin Jewkes and Carrie Kaumans)", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America (hearingloss.org)", "date": "2025-12-11", "kind": "Manufacturer Q&A (follow-up to an HLAA webinar)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic | Listen Technologies, which makes hearing loop drivers and the Auri Auracast system; the answers are written in the company's voice and published on HLAA's website after a webinar the company presented for HLAA)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/presentations/auracast-post-webinar-questions-all.pdf", "summary": "Written answers from a loop and Auracast maker to questions left over from a December 2025 HLAA webinar on running Auracast and hearing loops together.", "findings": [ "Audience questions on PDF pages 1, 6, 9, 15-16 and 20-21 ask about combining telecoils and Auracast or choosing hearing devices with both. Page 8 shows confusion between the room loop and the telecoil inside a hearing aid. These repeated questions come from one event; the document gives no distinct-asker count.", "Pages 1 and 8 ask how joining works without conventional pairing and whether a smartphone is required. Pages 3-4 and 8 ask what an assistant and channels are and how listeners choose a stream; pages 4 and 22 ask whether a phone can relay Auracast to older hearing aids. The questions identify uncertainty, not verified compatibility routes.", "On page 2, a listener says incoming Bluetooth calls stream automatically into their hearing aids and asks whether Auracast might behave that way. The question does not describe a call interrupting an Auracast listening session.", "Pages 2, 11 and 12 ask about implant-brand support, simultaneous hearing-aid/implant use, and whether a processor needs replacement or a software update. Pages 3 and 18 ask about readiness and activation; pages 5-7 and 13 ask about loan equipment, neckloops and separate receivers.", "On page 9, a hearing-aid owner asks how to encourage venues to offer Auracast and how it compares with room sound when music is easier to hear than dialogue. Page 13 asks for an installation directory, and page 16 asks about New York City venues.", "Page 12 asks the approximate cost of a device converting Auracast for devices without support; page 23 asks receiver/headphone/neckloop prices. Neither question states who would pay. Page 7 separately asks whether a listener can buy a receiver. Venue installation costs are asked on pages 3 and 9.", "Other audience questions concern a church's existing Wi-Fi route (page 3), speech delay (page 5), privacy beyond the venue (pages 7-8), receiver interoperability across manufacturers (page 10), and adding Auracast to a church loop (page 20). Audience roles are not stated for every question.", "Answers that hearing loops and Auracast need to coexist: loops give direct access today while Auracast is still gaining device support, and \"Both technologies will coexist for many years\".", "States that \"Currently, there are no hearing aids that include both Auracast (BLE) and T-coil in the same device\", citing size, antenna and battery limits.", "Gives $2,000 to $4,000 as a ballpark cost for a venue to install an Auracast system, and says most listeners still need a venue receiver with headphones or a neckloop.", "Says final performance criteria for Auracast, including latency, will not be complete until the end of 2027.", "Says its Sydney Opera House installation showed that venues can run Auracast side by side with existing assistive listening systems during the transition." ], "limitations": "Answers by a company that sells both technologies, without data or references. Its statement that no hearing aid has both a telecoil and Auracast conflicts with advocacy device lists that show models with both. The page 17 answer about a recent ReSound purchase also claims a neckloop can transmit through hearing-aid microphones without a telecoil; this is inconsistent with the telecoil receiving route in CHA's borrowed-equipment guide and RNID's hearing-loop guide. Audience questions can document concerns without validating these answers. There is no audience sample size, demographic breakdown or distinct-asker count. Undated; the date is that of the PDF file, after a webinar held on 3 December 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "listen-2025-la-470-neckloop", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2025-la-470-neckloop/", "title": "Auri Ear Phone/Neck Loop Lanyard (LA-470)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (product page)", "date": "2025-12-05", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the neckloop and of the Auri Auracast system it is sold for, which also sells RF/FM, infrared, hearing loop and Wi-Fi assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/shop/product/auri-ear-phone-neck-loop-lanyard/", "summary": "Listen Technologies' page for the neckloop lanyard it sells with its Auri RX1 Auracast receiver, with its field-strength claim.", "findings": [ "Describes a lanyard with an integrated neck loop driven by the maker's \"advanced DSP loop driver\", which adapts when connected to the Auri RX1 receiver so that users switch between telecoil mode and earphone mode, with a 3.5 mm socket for earbuds or headphones.", "Gives the neck loop field strength as 400 mA/m (±3 dB) and states that it \"Provides the correct field strength according to IEC60118-4\"; IEC 60118-4 is listed with RoHS under standards.", "Gives the earphone output's frequency response by stream sample rate: 50 Hz to 7.5 kHz at 16 kHz, 50 Hz to 11 kHz at 24 kHz and 50 Hz to 19.5 kHz at 48 kHz (±3 dB). No frequency response is given for the neck loop.", "Lists it as compatible with Auri RX1 receivers, and says in its FAQ that the earlier LA-438 neckloop is for the maker's infrared, RF, ListenTALK and Wi-Fi receivers.", "Presents it as a way for venues to provide assistive listening \"while meeting legislative requirements\"." ], "limitations": "A maker's claims for its own product: the field strength comes without a measurement method or position, and the neck loop's frequency response is not given. The date is the page's publication date in its metadata; it was last modified on 23 July 2026, and the page says specifications may change without notice.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "apple-2025-private-wifi-address", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/apple-2025-private-wifi-address/", "title": "Use private Wi-Fi addresses on Apple devices", "authors": "Apple", "publisher": "Apple Support", "date": "2025-12-05", "kind": "Manufacturer support page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Apple, maker of the iPhone and iPad; general guidance, not written about assistive listening)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/102509", "summary": "Apple's explanation of the private Wi-Fi address that iPhones and other Apple devices use on each network, and when users or organisations might change the setting.", "findings": [ "Explains that, to reduce tracking, Apple devices identify themselves to each Wi-Fi network with a different address (MAC address) and may change it periodically.", "From iOS 18 the setting is Off, Fixed or Rotating: devices choose Fixed on networks with WPA2 or stronger security, and Rotating, which changes the address every two weeks, on networks with weak or no security.", "States that a private address does not affect how users join or use most Wi-Fi networks, advises keeping it on, and says that if a device cannot join a network or reach its resources, users should install the latest software updates and try again before deciding to turn it off.", "Says businesses and other organisations might need to update their Wi-Fi network security to work with private addresses, or can turn the feature off for devices they manage." ], "limitations": "General guidance for all Wi-Fi networks; it does not mention audio streaming or venue systems, and covers Apple devices only. The date is the published date shown on the page.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-listen-2025-hlaa-presentation", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-listen-2025-hlaa-presentation/", "title": "Auracast Broadcast Audio and Hearing Loops: Better Together, Understanding the Future of Assistive Listening", "authors": "Jewkes K, Kaumans C (Ampetronic and Listen Technologies)", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America (slides hosted on its website)", "date": "2025-12-03", "kind": "Manufacturer presentation (slides hosted by HLAA)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic and Listen Technologies, both owned by Allvida, which between them sell hearing loops, the Auri Auracast system and RF, infrared and Wi-Fi systems; presented by Listen's chief of staff and its channel marketing director)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/presentations/ampetronic-listen-hlaa-presentation-december-3.pdf", "summary": "Two makers' slides for a hearing-loss association audience comparing Auracast with hearing loops, including a relative cost rating, and presenting the two as complementary.", "findings": [ "A comparison slide rates cost considerations as \"$$-$$$\" for Auracast and \"$$$-$$$$$\" for hearing loops, and installation considerations as \"Minimal\" for Auracast against \"Varies\" for loops.", "The same slide describes loops as well established and limited to one or two channels, and Auracast as in its beginning phases with a higher channel count; it calls the loop user experience \"One touch\" and Auracast's \"Similar to traditional B/T\" (Bluetooth).", "Presents the makers' own Auri system as the first Auracast-based solution for assistive listening, and gives Auracast a range of over 100 m.", "Lists common concerns about Auracast: whether a smartphone is required, whether it meets the ADA and international standards, readiness for widespread deployment, and latency; its closing slide calls loops proven, dependable access and the combination the foundation of future-ready accessibility." ], "limitations": "Marketing slides by makers that sell both technologies, with no prices, method or data behind the dollar-sign ratings. Read as a PDF of the slides without the spoken presentation. The date comes from the file name and the PDF's creation date (3 December 2025); the file's internal title refers to November 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "apel-2025-audioxpress-coexistence", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/apel-2025-audioxpress-coexistence/", "title": "Bluetooth LE Audio in the real world: tackling RF issues, interoperability, and use-case diversity", "authors": "Apel C (StreamUnlimited)", "publisher": "audioXpress (print issue December 2025; online 11 March 2026)", "date": "2025-12-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Trade article (engineering report)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Manufacturer (StreamUnlimited, maker of audio streaming modules)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://audioxpress.com/article/bluetooth-le-audio-in-the-real-world-tackling-rf-issues-interoperability-and-use-case-diversity", "summary": "An engineer's account of making LE Audio broadcast coexist with Wi-Fi inside combined Wi-Fi and Bluetooth audio products, with throughput tests and packet captures.", "findings": [ "With Wi-Fi and LE Audio in one chip, one coexistence setting let an LE Audio broadcast drive Wi-Fi throughput \"practically to zero\". After re-tuning, Wi-Fi dipped and then recovered. In both cases LE Audio playback was undisturbed.", "Captures of a broadcast showed each packet repeated several times, which adds robustness at the cost of Wi-Fi airtime and sensitivity.", "In the example shown, the LE Audio transmitter avoided the active Wi-Fi channel but transmitted at the same time as Wi-Fi.", "Small products leave little room to separate antennas, and noise from DC/DC converters or switched-mode power supplies can reduce receiver sensitivity.", "Early LE Audio products formed closed ecosystems that paired only within one product family; cross-chip interoperability needed firmware-level work with chip vendors." ], "limitations": "Concerns radios inside one product, not venue transmitters and listeners in a room. Results are shown as graphs without numeric values, chip models or test conditions.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "interference" ] }, { "id": "chodkowska-2025", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/chodkowska-2025/", "title": "Communication between a pharmacist and a patient with hearing loss in a community pharmacy: prospective, non-invasive questionnaire study", "authors": "Chodkowska W, Skarżyńska M", "publisher": "Prospects in Pharmaceutical Sciences 24(2):60-66 (Medical University of Warsaw)", "date": "2025-11-30", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (questionnaire survey of pharmacists)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Medical University of Warsaw; the corresponding author is also affiliated with the Center of Hearing and Speech and the Institute of Sensory Organs in Kajetany; the authors state that the study received no external funding and declare no conflicts of interest)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://prospects.wum.edu.pl/index.php/pps/article/view/790", "summary": "An anonymous survey of 130 community pharmacists in Poland in March and April 2025 on how they communicate with patients who have hearing loss and what tools their pharmacies use.", "findings": [ "Materials and Methods (p. 61) describes the target group as community pharmacists over 25 years old, regardless of locality size, answering anonymously online or on paper. It gives no recruitment frame or response rate.", "130 pharmacists working in community pharmacies answered a 19-question survey, online or on paper, between March and April 2025.", "Asked whether the pharmacy where they work uses tools that facilitate communication with hearing-impaired people, such as printed materials or an \"induction loop station - sound amplifier\", 123 of 129 (95.3%) answered no, 5 (3.9%) did not know and 1 (0.8%) answered yes.", "52.3% answered \"definitely not\" when asked whether their professional training had adequately prepared them to deal with hearing-impaired patients, and a further 35.4% did not think so. 49.2% rated their own communication skills with these patients as average, 28.5% as low and 13.1% as very low.", "Asked how often they meet difficulties in communicating with hearing-impaired patients, 51.5% said rarely, 29.2% often and 10.8% very often.", "In an open question answered by 41 pharmacists, the suggestions mentioned most often were written or graphic materials and sound amplification devices; others were tablets with styluses, training, quiet rooms for conversations, QR codes linking to sign-language videos, and transparent masks." ], "limitations": "A convenience sample of 130 pharmacists in one country, with no response rate; answers are self-reports. The question on tools groups printed materials with loops and amplifiers, so it does not show how many pharmacies have a loop. Percentages for single questions were read from the article's charts. Published online on 30 November 2025; the final version appeared on 5 May 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "pew-2025-mobile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pew-2025-mobile/", "title": "Mobile Fact Sheet", "authors": "Pew Research Center", "publisher": "Pew Research Center", "date": "2025-11-20", "kind": "Paper (national survey fact sheet)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, its primary funder; the survey was conducted for the Center by SSRS)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/mobile/", "summary": "US cellphone and smartphone ownership from a 2025 national survey, broken down by age and other characteristics.", "findings": [ "91% of US adults own a smartphone.", "By age, smartphone ownership is 97% at 18-29, 96% at 30-49, 90% at 50-64 and 78% at 65 and older.", "16% of adults 65 and older have a cellphone that is not a smartphone, against 2-7% in the younger age groups.", "Based on Pew's National Public Opinion Reference Survey of 5,022 US adults from 5 February to 18 June 2025, using address-based sampling by web, mail and phone, weighted to the US adult population." ], "limitations": "General population figures with no breakdown by hearing loss or disability, and nothing on whether phones can connect to hearing aids or run a venue's app. Ownership does not show whether people can or will use a phone to listen at a venue. US only.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "wifi-networks", "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "hlaa-2025-hearing-life-auracast-transition", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hlaa-2025-hearing-life-auracast-transition/", "title": "An Exciting Advancement: Navigating the Transition to Auracast (with the sidebar \"Coexisting Assistive Listening Systems: Working Toward Inclusive Hearing Access\")", "authors": "Kaneb A; sidebar by Perazzoli C", "publisher": "Hearing Life magazine, Fall/Winter 2025 (Hearing Loss Association of America)", "date": "2025-11-15", "kind": "Magazine article (advocacy)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (HLAA's member magazine; both authors serve on HLAA's board of directors, and Cheri Perazzoli is president of HLAA's Washington State association and founded the Let's Loop Seattle campaign; the article's photographs show receivers provided by Ampetronic | Listen Technologies at the HLAA 2025 convention)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/hearing-life-magazine/2025/fall-winter/hl-2025-3-kaneb.pdf", "summary": "Two HLAA board members on how venues and listeners should handle the move to Auracast: keep loops and telecoils working, add Auracast alongside, and expect the transition to take years.", "findings": [ "Andrea Kaneb writes that hearing device makers must keep offering telecoils and that \"venues must keep their hearing loops and other assistive listening systems in working order\" during the transition, and that legacy systems such as loops should stay in place so no one is left out.", "Notes that many people upgrade hearing devices only every five to seven years, that houses of worship and municipal buildings upgrade slowly, and that many existing systems will remain in place for years; a new international standard for Auracast is expected by late 2027.", "On cost, says it depends on the room and infrastructure, that in many venues Auracast can be simpler to deploy than a hearing loop, and that early estimates are often higher than for FM or infrared.", "Says a hearing device's own streamer plugged into an Auracast receiver is likely to add latency, and that Auracast avoids the magnetic interference that can affect loops while its behaviour with heavy Wi-Fi or Bluetooth traffic is still to be confirmed in real use.", "In the sidebar, Cheri Perazzoli names the WYO Performing Arts and Education Center in Sheridan, Wyoming, and the Sydney Opera House as venues offering a hearing loop and Auracast side by side, writes that \"Coexistence is not duplication\", and asks listeners to encourage venues to implement both.", "Calls for large, independent multi-site studies across diverse users." ], "limitations": "Advocacy writing without data or references; the authors are long-standing loop advocates. The date is that of the PDF file; the issue is labelled Fall/Winter 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2025-pbp", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2025-pbp/", "title": "Public Broadcast Profile, version 1.0.2", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Audio, Telephony, and Automotive Working Group", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2025-11-03", "kind": "Specification", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/Files/Specification/HTML/pbp_v1-0-2_1761252922/PBP_v1.0.2/out/en/index-en.html", "summary": "The Bluetooth specification that defines the Public Broadcast Announcement, the Standard Quality and High Quality stream classes, and the broadcast name used by Auracast transmitters.", "findings": [ "Sections 2.1 and 3.1 define Public Broadcast Source, Public Broadcast Sink and Public Broadcast Assistant roles; a device must support at least one role and may support concurrent roles.", "Standard Quality means a stream using one of the settings that every Bluetooth LE Audio broadcast receiver must be able to decode (16 or 24 kHz in the Basic Audio Profile); High Quality means one of twelve listed 48 kHz settings.", "The Public Broadcast Announcement shows whether the streams are encrypted and whether Standard Quality and High Quality streams are configured, so a phone or hearing aid can skip a broadcast it cannot use without reading the full stream description.", "Encryption covers a whole broadcast group: either all its streams use the same Broadcast Code or none are encrypted.", "The broadcast name must be human-readable UTF-8 text of 4 to 32 bytes, and scanning devices must accept up to 128 bytes for backward compatibility. Several transmitters carrying the same audio may use the same name.", "An optional immediate-rendering flag lets receivers play audio as early as they can instead of at the transmitter's Presentation Delay; receivers worn as a set should act on it only if all of them can play at the same time.", "The profile sets no venue coverage, transmit-power or audio-level targets and no numeric limit for complete-path latency. Section 5.4 does define rendering behavior relative to Presentation_Delay when the optional immediate-rendering flag is set.", "Lets several broadcasters give the same Broadcast_Name to broadcasts carrying the same audio, so that a receiving device can identify alternative transmitters of the same stream (section 5.1).", "The Version History records Board adoption of version 1.0 on 5 July 2022, version 1.0.1 on 1 October 2024 and version 1.0.2 on 3 November 2025. The abstract describes announcements enabling discovery and rendering of public broadcast audio using commonly supported audio configurations.", "Section 1.1.1, Table 1.1, lists errata incorporated in version 1.0.1 affecting role requirements and advertising/metadata structures, including Broadcast_Name, Audio_Active_State and Broadcast_Audio_Immediate_Rendering_Flag.", "Section 1.1.2, Table 1.2, lists errata incorporated in version 1.0.2 affecting profile role support, Link Layer feature support, Public Broadcast Announcements and Broadcast_Name formatting. These tables identify affected sections, without demonstrating product performance changes.", "Section 2.5 states compatibility with Bluetooth Core Specification 5.2 or later. This profile-level statement does not establish that every Core 5.2 device supports public broadcast audio." ], "limitations": "A product specification for interoperability, not an installation or venue standard. Rules for public transmitters, such as defaulting to Standard Quality, come from the SIG's separate transmitter guide.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "large-venues", "finding-and-joining", "privacy", "broadcast-security", "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2025-pilatus-arena", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2025-pilatus-arena/", "title": "Technical analysis of the Bluetooth Auracast system in the Pilatus Arena", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz (in German)", "date": "2025-11-03", "kind": "Field test", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association; test devices were lent free by their manufacturers or owned by participants)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/news/technische-analyse-des-bluetooth-auracast-systems-in-der-pilatus-arena/", "summary": "A visit to the Pilatus Arena in Kriens, described as Switzerland's first sports stadium with an Auracast assistive listening system, testing roaming between transmitters, reception and the delay at a rear seat.", "findings": [ "Four transmitters of one brand share one broadcast name. That brand's receivers show a single stream and switch automatically to the transmitter with the strongest signal (RSSI) as the listener moves.", "Phones and hearing aids did not do this at the time: their assistants listed four identically named streams with no way to tell which was strongest. Developers told the authors this is expected to be fixed.", "The three hearing aid models and two headphones tested received the streams, with phones used as assistants. Audio quality, intelligibility and reception were judged faultless with personal devices and with the arena's loaned receivers with neckloops.", "From simultaneous recordings at a rear seat, the Auracast signal arrived less than 30 ms ahead of the loudspeaker sound, with smaller offsets nearer the loudspeakers. The authors conclude that no disturbing echo arises even with hearing aids that add more delay.", "The introduction dates the visit to November 2025. The Roaming and So verlief der Test sections name four Listen Auri TX2N transmitters, Auri RX1 receivers, Starkey Edge, GN ReSound Vivia and Oticon Intent hearing aids, and Humantechnik earisMAX and JBL Tour Pro 3 headphones. The report supplies no receiver-specific coverage map.", "The Test section identifies the timing signal as the direct output of an Auri RX1 receiver, recorded simultaneously with airborne sound during a short video of the match; the offset was evaluated afterwards in Audacity." ], "limitations": "One visit during a match, with one transmitter brand. The test section describes a short recording, without stating the duration of the visit, participant count, attendance, full-bowl coverage or seat-to-transmitter distances. Ratings are the testers' judgement without stated criteria. The delay was measured at one rear seat through a dedicated receiver, not through each hearing aid.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "loan-receivers", "large-venues", "finding-and-joining", "neckloops", "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "listen-2025-lt800-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2025-lt800-manual/", "title": "User Manual: LT-800-072, LT-803-072 and LT-800-216 Stationary RF Transmitters", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2025-11-03", "kind": "Manufacturer installation manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, which sells the FM transmitters described as well as infrared, hearing loop, Wi-Fi and Auracast assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/LT-800_803-User-Manual-2025-11-03-vA4-WEB.pdf", "summary": "A maker's manual for its rack-mounted venue FM transmitters at 72 MHz and 216 MHz: channels, power, antennas, cable loss, channel selection for several transmitters, compatibility with other brands and the regulatory notices.", "findings": [ "Gives 72.025-75.950 MHz with 17 wideband and 40 narrowband channels and a field strength of 80,000 µV at 3 m for the 72 MHz model, and 216.025-216.9875 MHz with 19 wideband and 38 narrowband channels at 100 mW, \"max allowed by FCC\", for the 216 MHz model; system frequency response is 50 Hz-15 kHz at 72 MHz and 50 Hz-10 kHz at 216 MHz.", "Says choosing an interference-free channel is \"trial and error\": with transmitters off, listen on the receivers to each wideband channel and pick the quietest.", "Says at most six transmitters work at once in the same space at 72 MHz and three at 216 MHz, recommends adjacent channels at least 300 kHz apart and names a recommended channel set for each band; transmitters spread over a large area can use adjacent channels if the adjacent-channel transmitter is at least 50% further from the receiver than its own.", "Advises the lowest power setting when several transmitters share an environment and full power otherwise, locking the chosen channel, mounting the antenna high and vertical, away from metal, and keeping coaxial cable short; it gives RG-58 losses of about 4 dB per 100 ft at 72 MHz and 8 dB per 100 ft at 216 MHz, and notes that a portable receiver's headset cord is its antenna.", "Describes 72 MHz as \"a secondary frequency band\" where paging and other licensed transmitters can interfere, and 216 MHz as \"a primary frequency band\" on which \"no other types of transmissions are authorized\", while warning that a nearby TV channel 13 transmitter can cause intermodulation, in which case it suggests switching to 72 MHz.", "Its FCC statement says the 216 MHz transmitter is authorised under the Low Power Radio Service (Part 95), needs no licence, must not interfere with TV reception or the Air Force Space Surveillance System at 216.88-217.08 MHz, and may be used only for auditory assistance, health care, law enforcement tracking or AMTS control; its Canadian statement repeats the channel 13 test and the advice to use a channel near 217 MHz.", "Says its SQ noise reduction works only with its own SQ receivers and must be switched off for other makers' or older receivers, gives cross-reference tables to other brands' channel numbers, and warns that some other makers' receivers may distort with its +25 kHz deviation.", "Recommends lower-loss RG-8 antenna cable rather than RG-58, and setting each transmitter to its lowest output power that covers the area, to reduce the possibility of interference.", "The specification table on printed page 3 labels its system figures as wireless end-to-end: frequency response ±3 dB, total harmonic distortion below 2% at 80% deviation, and A-weighted signal-to-noise ratio of 80 dB with SQ enabled for LT-800, versus 60 dB at 72 MHz or 50 dB at 216 MHz with SQ disabled. The separate architectural paragraph gives a 63 Hz lower frequency limit, while the table gives 50 Hz." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's manual for its own products, without measurements. Its description of 216 MHz as reserved is narrower than the FCC and Canadian rules, which share the band with other uses, and its specification table lists FCC Part 90 for the 216 MHz model while its FCC statement cites Part 95. The date is from the file name of the version linked from the product page (version A4, 3 November 2025); the printed footer still reads 17 June 2024, version A3.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "rf-fm-bands", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "opus-2025-auragate-datasheet", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/opus-2025-auragate-datasheet/", "title": "AuraGate broadcast terminal datasheet", "authors": "Aura by Opus (Opus Technologies)", "publisher": "Opus Technologies", "date": "2025-11-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer datasheet", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Opus Technologies)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://aurabyopus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/AuraGate_Datasheet.pdf", "summary": "Two-page datasheet for the AuraGate Auracast transmitter: power by region, latency, a measured open-field range and audio inputs.", "findings": [ "Transmitter power is 10 dBm for the European Union and 20 dBm for the United States.", "States a measured range of 150 m in open range and latency of up to 30 ms.", "Supports 16, 24 and 48 kHz with stated responses of 50 Hz to 7.5, 11 and 19.5 kHz, AGC, and line, microphone, 100 V, S/PDIF and USB inputs.", "The configuration app sets the broadcast name, audio quality, range and an optional access code, and can share the code and a QR code." ], "limitations": "Undated; the date here is that of its upload folder (November 2025). It does not say which power variant, receiver or method produced the 150 m figure, or between which points latency is measured.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "real-range" ] }, { "id": "cha-2025-als-quick-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-2025-als-quick-guide/", "title": "Assistive Listening Systems Quick Guide", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access (reviewed by Juliette Sterkens, AuD)", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access, The John G. Shedd Institute", "date": "2025-10-29", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts; it states that it accepts no donations from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/Assistive-Listening-Systems-Quick-Guide.pdf", "summary": "A three-page comparison of hearing loops, FM/RF, infrared, audio over Wi-Fi and Auracast used as an assistive listening system, for users and facility staff.", "findings": [ "Gives typical latency ranges of about 1-20 ms for loops and infrared, 1-30 ms for FM/RF, 200-300+ ms for audio over Wi-Fi, and about 36-100+ ms for Auracast depending on transmitter, receiver and sample rate. It calls less than 30-40 ms acceptable.", "States that 16 kHz and 24 kHz sample-rate streams work with hearing aids and cochlear implants, while 48 kHz music-quality streams do not.", "Lists Auracast's standing against the ADA standard as \"under investigation\", marks service counters, retail checkouts and speech-transfer systems as \"yet to be solved\", and marks classrooms, movie theaters, museums, stadiums and public transport as in development.", "Says receivers with neckloops will be needed for the foreseeable future because extremely few hearing aid users have Auracast.", "Advises that any system needing a QR code, an app or extra devices will leave some people out." ], "limitations": "A summary chart: the latency ranges are not linked to specific measurements. The guide states that consumers prefer hearing loops, so it reflects the publisher's advocacy position.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "finding-and-joining", "service-counters", "listener-preference", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "infrared-limits", "loop-and-auracast", "lifetime-costs", "transport", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops", "theatres-and-cinemas", "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2025-assistant-howto", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2025-assistant-howto/", "title": "How to build an Auracast assistant: technical overview, version 1.0", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Market Development", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2025-10-29", "kind": "Industry guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2403_How_To_Auracast_Assistant.pdf", "summary": "The SIG's design guide for the phone apps, watches and remotes that find broadcasts and tell hearing aids or earbuds which one to join.", "findings": [ "Hearing aids and earbuds may receive less well than the assistant, so an assistant can list broadcasts that the listener's devices cannot pick up; whether to show only transmitters above a signal-strength threshold is left to each app.", "If a broadcast announces no 16 or 24 kHz stream and the listener's device cannot decode 48 kHz, the listener may need to ask for a Standard Quality stream to be turned on.", "No method is specified for an assistant to obtain a Broadcast Code; the guide lists manual entry of a printed code, QR codes or NFC tags, and codes passed from a built-in transmitter such as a TV.", "A transmitter cannot change its Broadcast Code during a broadcast; a new code means stopping and restarting the broadcast.", "Sections 2.1 and 4.3 describe delegating power-hungry discovery from small-battery hearing devices to an assistant, which may scan on request rather than continuously to conserve its own battery. They report no measured battery-life penalty.", "Sections 4.3.3-4.5 describe examining subgroup content (including language), codec settings and channel positions, maintaining a list and requesting reception of selected BISes. Section 2.2 leaves interface design to manufacturers; sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.3 leave filtering policies to implementations." ], "limitations": "Design guidance for app and device makers. Although written after the Broadcast Audio URI specification was adopted in 2024, it describes the format for codes in QR codes as not yet standardised.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "signal-target", "finding-and-joining", "privacy", "courts-and-chambers", "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "nct-2025-national-churches-survey", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nct-2025-national-churches-survey/", "title": "National Churches Survey: Giving every church a voice (full report)", "authors": "National Churches Trust; research by Whitestone", "publisher": "National Churches Trust", "date": "2025-10-28", "kind": "Paper (national survey of church buildings)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (National Churches Trust, a UK charity that supports church buildings of all denominations; questionnaire and analysis with the research consultancy Whitestone; the report thanks Yeomans, Ecclesiastical Insurance and the University of York for support that enabled the survey)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.nationalchurchestrust.org/sites/default/files/2025-11/FULL_NationalChurchesTrust_SurveyReport_AW_281025.pdf", "summary": "A 2025 survey of 3,628 UK churches, chapels and meeting houses on their buildings, facilities, finances and volunteers, including how many have a hearing loop.", "findings": [ "Reports that hearing loops \"are now present in nearly two-thirds (65%) of churches\", alongside step-free entrances in 82% and accessible toilets in 73%; only 9% have invested in clear signage for people with visual impairments.", "Surveyed churches between 9 May and July 2025 through an invitation page, denominations, heritage and church networks, the media and reminders; 3,628 churches took part, and results were weighted by denomination, UK nation, rurality and listed status. The Trust describes the responses as broadly representative of the UK by denomination, attendance, building age and location.", "Says churches have often made access upgrades through local fundraising and volunteers, \"even in places where statutory obligations do not apply\".", "83% of churches say managing their buildings depends on an active body of volunteers, and 45% name a lack of volunteer time as a major barrier to doing more, up from 33% who said it limited them in 2010 (the question wording changed)." ], "limitations": "Self-reported by churches that chose to respond, mostly online; the hearing loop question asks only whether a loop is present, not whether it works, covers the worship space or meets a standard, and the survey asks about no other assistive listening system. The 2010 comparison figure for loops is shown only in a chart. The date is taken from the report file (created 28 October 2025, file name dated 281025); press coverage of the findings began on 23 October 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "australia-2025-heritage-grants-guidelines", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/australia-2025-heritage-grants-guidelines/", "title": "Australian Heritage Grants Round 8 (2025-26): Grant Opportunity Guidelines", "authors": "Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water; Department of Industry, Science and Resources", "publisher": "Australian Government, Business Grants Hub", "date": "2025-10-27", "kind": "Guidance (government grant guidelines)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Australian Government; DCCEEW policy programme administered by DISR)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://business.gov.au/-/media/grants-and-programs/ahg-2025-26/australian-heritage-grants-202526--grant-opportunity-guidelinespdf.pdf", "summary": "Australia’s 2025-26 heritage grant guidelines explicitly allow hearing loops as an accessibility activity at National Heritage List places, subject to the project and applicant rules.", "findings": [ "The cover gives a Round 8 opening date of 27 October 2025 and a closing deadline of 5 pm Australian Eastern Daylight Time on 5 December 2025. Section 3.2, page 7, requires projects to finish by 31 March 2028.", "Grants range from A$25,000 to A$400,000 excluding GST. Applicants normally contribute at least 20% of eligible project costs in cash or in kind, with an exceptional-circumstances exemption process.", "Applicants must own a listed place or provide current owner support, have an Australian Business Number unless not entitled to one, and belong to an eligible entity category. Eligible locations are on the National Heritage List by the closing date.", "Section 5.1, page 9, lists hearing loops among accessibility improvements. Activities must relate to protecting, conserving, engaging with or managing access to the listed place’s National Heritage Values.", "Eligible costs can include contractors, expert advice and materials or equipment. The grant agreement and budget govern expenditure; ongoing organisational operating costs and retrospective funding or works underway are excluded.", "The grant does not itself provide planning or heritage approvals. The government is not responsible for expenditure incurred before a grant agreement is executed." ], "limitations": "Full guidelines saved; relevant eligibility, cost and date pages read and visually checked. The stated December 2025 deadline has passed; the guidelines are not a later closure notice or evidence of the October 2026 application status. Listed heritage places only; hearing-loop inclusion does not establish eligibility of every venue, project or alternative technology.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "sig-transmitter-guide-v3", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-transmitter-guide-v3/", "title": "Auracast simple transmitter best practices guide, version 3", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2025-10-17", "kind": "Industry guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Auracast-Transmitter_Recommendations.pdf", "summary": "The SIG's recommendations for designing, installing and documenting simple standalone Auracast transmitters.", "findings": [ "Section 1.2.1.2 (page 5) says High Quality stream support is not mandatory in BAP or PBP, so some Auracast receivers cannot receive and render those streams.", "A public Auracast transmitter must always transmit at least one Standard Quality stream, and products marketed for public locations must default to Standard Quality.", "Its example settings use a Presentation Delay of 40 ms, which it says all Auracast devices support; a flag can tell receivers they may render earlier.", "Transmitters should run at a long-term reference level of -35 dBFS (equivalent to 70 dB SPL) with a maximum of -3 dBFS.", "Recommends the lowest power that covers the intended area, found by walking the area with a receiver and raising power step by step, and repeating the check when the room is in use; mounting above head level reduces the effect of people.", "Section 3.2 (page 25), under Broadcast range, also asks installers to repeat the coverage check after the transmitter location changes, testing audio reception throughout the intended area.", "Encourages registering a public installation with the SIG.", "Says a transmitter can be designed to meet regulations worldwide at output powers up to +20 dBm, and that regulatory requirements differ between markets.", "Section 1.2.1.1 defines Standard Quality as the mandatory Broadcast Sink LC3 configurations at 16 or 24 kHz with 10 ms frames. Section 2.2 (pages 7-8) says public locations must make Standard Quality available for all audio content they provide through Auracast; the Broadcast quality guidance on page 25 repeats this for locations promoting Auracast availability.", "Section 1.2.1.2 identifies High Quality public broadcast audio with 48 kHz LC3 sampling; section 1.2.1.1 identifies Standard Quality with 16 or 24 kHz LC3 sampling.", "Section 2 (page 7) describes a standalone transmitter connected by cable to the output of a sound system or television; Figure 2.1 shows optical, HDMI ARC and analogue audio input examples." ], "limitations": "Mostly recommendations; its mandatory statements come from the Auracast trademark requirements. It sets no numeric coverage or signal-strength pass/fail level.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "device-compatibility", "signal-target", "audio-level", "interference", "commissioning-tests", "auracast-multiple-streams", "auracast-qualification", "room-acoustics", "sound-quality", "procurement" ] }, { "id": "listen-2025-listenir-privacy", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2025-listenir-privacy/", "title": "Why Use Infrared? The Unique Benefits of ListenIR for Privacy and Security", "authors": "Listen Team (Listen Technologies)", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (blog)", "date": "2025-10-10", "kind": "Manufacturer article", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, which sells the ListenIR products described as well as FM, hearing loop, Wi-Fi and Auracast systems)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/secure-infrared-assistive-listening-listenir/", "summary": "A maker's case for its infrared systems in rooms that need privacy, such as courtrooms, clinics, boardrooms and government buildings.", "findings": [ "Claims infrared signals \"cannot pass through walls, ceilings, or glass\", so audio stays in the room where it is transmitted.", "Claims light-based transmission is immune to electromagnetic interference and gives clear audio in places crowded with radio traffic, because it uses no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or radio signal.", "Recommends infrared for courtrooms and legal offices, hospitals and clinics, corporate boardrooms, and government and defence buildings.", "Says its receivers work with telecoil hearing aids through neckloops, and states that the system \"Meets ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements\"." ], "limitations": "Marketing by the maker of the products described, with no measurements. The glass claim differs from guidance that windows must be covered to keep infrared confidential (Compton-Conley 2015), and its interference-free claim is qualified by the maker's own 2022 manual, which says its infrared systems are not immune to sunlight and plasma displays. Last modified 14 April 2026 according to the page's metadata.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "which-technology", "infrared-limits", "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2025-compat", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2025-compat/", "title": "Auracast transmitter-receiver compatibility test (with data workbook)", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "date": "2025-10-06", "kind": "Bench and hall test", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association; no manufacturer funding, test products lent free by manufacturers)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/news/auracast-transmitter-receiver-compatibility-test/", "summary": "Latency, frequency response and reception quality for many transmitter and receiver pairs. Latency was measured 25 August to 5 September 2025 and the hall reception test was run on 25 September 2025.", "findings": [ "End-to-end latency ranged from 26 ms to 205 ms depending on the transmitter-receiver pair. Among professional transmitters for installations, the lowest was 29 ms at 16 kHz; the highest to a hearing aid was 95 ms.", "Hearing aids tended to be slower than other receivers. PIN code protection (a Broadcast Code) did not affect latency.", "In a 75 x 57 m hall with an 18 m ceiling, with the transmitter deliberately placed for maximum distance and no significant event interference, 26 of the 51 pairs included in the overall evaluation scored 4 or 5 on a 1 to 5 scale: dropouts and distortion from about 5 to 10 m and heavy dropouts or distortion from about mid-hall (about 40 m). 16 pairs scored 1 or 2, with reception throughout the hall.", "Results depended strongly on the pair, for reasons the testers could not explain: one transmitter rated 1 (best grade, allowing very few dropouts) with its own brand's receiver and 5 (worst) with another receiver. Two professional receivers only received their own brand's transmitters.", "Firmware changed results: one transmitter's latency at 16 kHz was 30 ms higher with a newer firmware version, and one earbud compatibility problem appeared to be resolved by firmware, with further testing required.", "Its test-setup sheet says the test is not representative of other installations, because reflections from room surfaces play a critical role in reception quality and can vary significantly.", "The linked workbook, Latencies - Test Setup!B2:B11, specifies pseudo-random full-range pink noise, transfer-function measurement with Smaart V8 and a QSC Q-SYS Core 8 flex (Designer V9.13), and one transmitter operating at a time. Its 10-second average applies to frequency-response measurement. The latency matrix B4:AJ14 contains 219 numeric readings; row 1 identifies transmitter and firmware, row 3 sample rate/mode, and column A receiver, firmware and assistant where used.", "The matrix legend (A29:A33) distinguishes electrical line/AUX input and headphone-output measurement, acoustic microphone input and acoustic output measurement, and magnetic input through a telecoil. Columns R/S/T test the GN MultiMic+ through those three input routes respectively; AF is acoustic input and AI/AJ are acoustic input to SoundLinker. The receiver rows include dedicated receivers, hearing aids, headphones and earbuds. Non-numeric status cells are not zero-delay results.", "Matrix comments B4, C4 and D4 say the Auri TX2N-to-RX1 latencies exceed earlier tests and other reports, and require further testing. Comment A5 says Bettear RTX latency can rise during a connection and reconnecting can restore a lower value; unannotated earlier cells may record either initial or elevated delay. The behaviour also occurred with receiver firmware 1.0.3. Comments on E5:G5, K5:L5, O5:P5 and X5 identify connections made available by that firmware.", "For Bettear RTX, the matrix comments report these sequences in ms: G5 49 to 66; H5 33 to 41; I5 34 to 41; J5 36 to 43; K5 29 to 37 and sometimes 40; M5 34 to 42; O5 and P5 39 to 37 and sometimes 58; V5 36 to 44; Y5 42 to 45, then 54 and sometimes 60; AA5 44 to 45 and then 53; AF5 63 to 64; AH5 26 to 27 and then 28. O5 itself is 49, which conflicts with its comment starting at 39.", "Other Bettear RTX comment ranges in ms are Z5 31-42, AB5 39-52, AC5 42-71, AD5 52-85, AE5 58-83 and AG5 26-47. Comments Y10 and Y11 report 70 to 73 ms for the earis MAX headphones and 69 to 72 ms for Moor Duo. AB3 and AC3 say all receivers dropped by 1 ms after several minutes and the matrix retains the earlier readings; H1 reports approximately 1 ms fluctuation for B-CASTER.", "Conclusions A4/A9 attribute 29 ms at 16 kHz to a Williams receiver, but matrix K5 assigns 29 ms to Bettear RTX and K6 gives Williams 30 ms. Conclusions A10 says Williams 33 ms at 24 kHz, whereas L6 gives Williams 32 ms and L5 gives Bettear 33 ms. The receiver attribution in those conclusions is therefore unresolved.", "Comments N1 and N3 disagree on whether the hardware tested was AurOEM or AuraLoop, though both refer to the same module; N1 limits AurLoop to 16/24 kHz. N3 reports a 30 ms increase at 16 kHz with firmware 2.0.0 relative to 1.2.0. Matrix AE7 gives Vivia 99 ms at 48 kHz despite A7 stating that hearing aids do not support 48 kHz. A12 says The Show receives 48 kHz by automatic connection, while selection through the phone Bluetooth menu fails.", "The setup sheet declares measurements from 25 August to 5 September 2025. Some firmware notes and comment readings were edited later in September, without separate test dates. Those comment edit times do not establish when each measurement was made.", "The reception worksheet (sheet 6 in the workbook, B2:P7) has 51 numerical ratings: 26 scored 4 or 5 and 16 scored 1 or 2. Two further ratings in H8 and J9 concern receivers restricted to their own brands; the note at A21 excludes those receivers from the overall evaluation. Thus the full matrix contains 53 ratings, with 51 in the main comparison. The setup sheet describes testing without significant interference from stage equipment, Wi-Fi, smartphones or similar event equipment.", "In the latency worksheet comments, N3 says firmware 2.0.0 raised 16 kHz latency by 30 ms compared with 1.2.0. A9 says firmware 4.9.6 appears to resolve the earbud issue seen with 4.9.5 but requires further testing; this is a tentative observation, not a confirmed fix.", "The Signal Reception - Rating sheet has 53 numeric pair ratings in B2:P9: nine at 1, eight at 2, nine at 3, eleven at 4 and sixteen at 5. Its A21 note excludes the two receivers that only received their own brand’s transmitters from the overall evaluation and means. Removing their two rated cells (H8=1 and J9=4) leaves 51 pairs, 16 rated 1 or 2 and 26 rated 4 or 5. Ratings 1 and 2 allow very few or occasional dropouts and low audio artefacts, rather than requiring uninterrupted reception.", "The Signal Reception - Test Setup sheet (B2:B9) identifies BERNEXPO Stage in Bern, a 75 x 57 m hall with an 18 m ceiling, on 25 September 2025. An NTI MR-PRO supplied pink noise to each transmitter through its analogue input. The testers listened for dropouts, jitter and distortion as distance increased. The setup describes no significant interference from typical event equipment; it gives no audience count.", "On Signal Reception - Rating (A13:A17), grade 1 allows no or very few dropouts and minimal artefacts throughout the room; grade 2 allows occasional dropouts or low artefacts. Grade 3 describes occasional dropouts or slight jitter or distortion from about 10 m, increasing around mid-room. Grade 4 describes dropouts and artefacts from about 5-10 m, frequent and significant by about 40 m, with possible manual reconnection. Grade 5 starts symptoms as early as 5 m, with severe symptoms beyond that and connection interruptions or extreme distortion or dropouts around mid-room. These are grade definitions, not separately measured maximum distances for every pair.", "The rated transmitter columns in Signal Reception - Rating are B: Starkey TV-Streamer FW: not reported; C: Opus Auragate FW:2.1.0; D: Moor Moer SoundLinker FW:5.2.2; E: Arendi TV-Streamer Low Latency FW:0.8.1; F: GN TV-Streamer + FW:1.0.2.7; G: Bettear B-CASTER FW:1.0.3; H: Listen Auri TX2N FW:1.5; I: GN MultiMic+ FW:1.0.2.7; J: Williams Infinium FW:1.4.0; K: Arendi TV-Streamer High Reliability FW:0.8.1. Firmware is shown as recorded in the workbook.", "Signal Reception - Rating, row 2: Starkey Edge FW: not reported; scored cells B2=1, C2=1, D2=1, E2=1, F2=1, G2=1, H2=5, I2=3, J2=3. Blank cells are not scored results.", "Signal Reception - Rating, row 3: JBL Tour Pro 3 FW:4.9.6; scored cells C3=2, D3=1, E3=4, F3=3, H3=5, I3=2, J3=5. Blank cells are not scored results.", "Signal Reception - Rating, row 4: GN Resound Vivia FW:10.21.2.1 via App iPhone 12; scored cells B4=2, C4=3, D4=1, E4=4, F4=4, G4=4, H4=4, I4=5, J4=4, K4=3. Blank cells are not scored results.", "Signal Reception - Rating, row 5: Moer Moor Duo #21 FW:3.7.0 via BT Menu on Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5; scored cells B5=2, C5=2, D5=2, E5=3, F5=5, G5=5, H5=4, I5=5, J5=5. Blank cells are not scored results.", "Signal Reception - Rating, row 6: Bettear RTX FW:1.0.1 & 1.0.3; scored cells C6=2, D6=5, E6=3, F6=4, G6=4, I6=5, J6=5. Blank cells are not scored results.", "Signal Reception - Rating, row 7: Humantechnik earis MAX Headphone FW: 4.4.0; scored cells B7=2, C7=3, D7=4, E7=3, F7=5, G7=5, H7=5, I7=5, J7=5. Blank cells are not scored results.", "Signal Reception - Rating, row 8: Listen Auri RX1 FW:1.5; scored cells H8=1. Blank cells are not scored results.", "Signal Reception - Rating, row 9: Williams Infinium Rx FW: not reported; scored cells J9=4. Blank cells are not scored results.", "The original web page states, before its workbook-tab list, that the tests had no manufacturer financial involvement and that manufacturers provided the products without charge as permanent or temporary loans." ], "limitations": "Results apply only to the firmware versions tested, and some firmware changed during the three weeks of testing. The hall test used one deliberately distant transmitter position and no significant interference from event equipment; the testers say it is not representative of other rooms.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "delay", "real-range", "device-compatibility", "signal-target", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "large-venues", "commissioning-tests", "future-proofing", "privacy", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "andreatta-2025", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/andreatta-2025/", "title": "Time delay and frequency analysis of remote microphones", "authors": "Andreatta E, Caregnato I, Selmo A, Gulli A, Onofrei MG, Orzan E", "publisher": "Audiology Research 15(5):123", "date": "2025-09-25", "kind": "Peer-reviewed laboratory study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (authors report no external research funding; IRCCS Burlo Garofolo paid the publication charge through Ricerca Corrente RC 05/21); two authors employed by Acustica Caregnato", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.mdpi.com/2039-4349/15/5/123", "summary": "Measured the delay and frequency response of two proprietary 2.4 GHz remote-microphone systems used with behind-the-ear hearing aids, alone and mixed with the hearing aids' own microphones.", "findings": [ "Two remote microphones from different manufacturers, each paired with a hearing aid, were measured in a semi-anechoic test chamber.", "Total delay through remote microphone and hearing aid was about 23-24 ms for one system and 33-35 ms for the other; the hearing aids alone added about 5-7 ms.", "When the remote-microphone signal and the hearing aid's own microphones had similar gain, the combined response showed comb-filter ripples.", "The authors conclude that similar transmission systems do not have the same delay, so any timing alignment has to be set per model and brand.", "Sections 2 and 3.1 describe 5-cycle tone bursts at 750, 1500 and 3000 Hz, at 70 dB SPL, comparing a reference microphone with a measurement microphone in a 2 cc coupler. Two compression settings were used. HA1 alone took about 6-7 ms and HA2 about 5-7 ms; RM1 plus HA1 took about 23-24 ms and RM2 plus HA2 about 33-35 ms.", "The Funding Statement distinguishes no external funding for the research from funding of the article processing charge by IRCCS Burlo Garofolo under project RC 05/21.", "The Funding Statement distinguishes no external research funding from the publication charge paid by IRCCS Burlo Garofolo under project RC 05/21; the author affiliations identify two authors at Acustica Caregnato." ], "limitations": "Two proprietary systems, not Auracast; idealised semi-anechoic conditions; no listener testing.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "acma-2025-lipd-class-licence", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/acma-2025-lipd-class-licence/", "title": "Radiocommunications (Low Interference Potential Devices) Class Licence 2025", "authors": "Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)", "publisher": "Federal Register of Legislation (Australian Government), F2025L01047", "date": "2025-09-04", "kind": "Regulation (Australian class licence)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Australian Communications and Media Authority)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2025L01047/asmade/text", "summary": "Australia's class licence for short-range transmitters, in force from 1 October 2025, with its bands for auditory assistance transmitters.", "findings": [ "Authorises auditory assistance transmitters at 3.155-3.4 MHz on four carriers at up to 60 µW EIRP, and at 41-42 MHz and 43-44 MHz on five carriers each at up to 1.3 mW EIRP.", "Authorises wireless audio transmitters and auditory assistance transmitters at 88-108 MHz at up to 10 µW EIRP, frequency modulated with a bandwidth of no more than 180 kHz, and not inside the licence area of a radio broadcasting service using the same channel.", "Authorises transmitters of any kind at up to 100 mW EIRP in several bands, including 150.7875-152.49375 MHz and 173.29375-174 MHz, and wireless audio transmitters at 174-230 MHz at up to 50 mW EIRP outside the coverage area of a broadcaster on that channel.", "Authorises transmitters of any kind at up to 3 mW EIRP in 915-928 MHz and 10 mW in 2400-2483.5 MHz, and frequency-hopping or digitally modulated transmitters at up to 1 W in 915-928 MHz and 500 mW or 4 W in 2400-2483.5 MHz, depending on the conditions attached to each entry.", "States that a receiver tuned to a class-licensed transmitter gets no protection from interference caused by other devices, and that class-licensed devices get no protection from industrial, scientific and medical equipment in bands including 918-926 MHz and 2400-2500 MHz." ], "limitations": "Sets bands and power only: nothing on audio quality, coverage or receivers. It names auditory assistance transmitters only in the low-power entries; which entry a given venue product uses is for its maker to state. Dated 4 September 2025, registered 5 September 2025, in force from 1 October 2025, replacing the 2015 class licence.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "google-2025-android-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/google-2025-android-auracast/", "title": "Share your world of sound with LE Audio on Android", "authors": "Ray P (Product Manager, Android)", "publisher": "Google, The Keyword blog", "date": "2025-09-03", "kind": "Manufacturer announcement", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Google)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://blog.google/products/android/le-audio-auracast-support/", "summary": "Google's announcement extending LE Audio Auracast support on Android to Pixel phones and Sony headphones, with a footnote listing the phones covered.", "findings": [ "Adds Auracast support to compatible Pixel phones, joining Samsung Galaxy and Xiaomi devices that already had it, and extends Android's LE Audio support to Sony headphones. Google says this lets more people listen to broadcasts at Auracast venues such as airports, museums and gyms.", "A footnote limits support to select phones: the Pixel 8 series and newer; Samsung Galaxy S23, S24 and S25 and Z Fold5, Fold6 and Fold7; and named Xiaomi and POCO models. It states that both the phone and the headphones must support LE Audio.", "Footnote 2 enumerates Xiaomi 14T, 14T Pro, 14, 15, 14 Ultra, 15 Ultra and MIX Flip, and POCO X6 Pro, F6 Pro, F7 Pro and F7 Ultra. This is a general compatibility list; it does not assign each model a receiver or assistant role or specify hearing-aid pairs.", "People can join a phone's own broadcast by scanning a QR code or with a single tap through Google Fast Pair." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer announcement of a software rollout, written mainly about sharing audio between friends. It does not state the Android version needed or test venue broadcasts, and phone lists change with later updates.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "finding-and-joining", "listener-reach", "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "mander-2025-auracast-public-broadcasting", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/mander-2025-auracast-public-broadcasting/", "title": "The times they are a-changin’ for public broadcasting", "authors": "Mander J", "publisher": "BATOD Magazine, September 2025, pp. 66–68; reprinted from Audacity", "date": "2025-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Audiologist article and informal field test", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Ewing Foundation audiologist; describes an installation involving the theatre, GN Hearing and Ampetronic; financial support unspecified)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.batod.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/W3883W.pdf", "summary": "An audiologist describes testing Auracast at Manchester’s Contact Theatre with the venue’s sound engineer and explains the transition from hearing loops.", "findings": [ "James Mander, an Ewing Foundation audiologist, describes the January 2025 Contact Theatre installation as involving Contact, GN Hearing, Ampetronic and the Ewing Foundation.", "Mander and sound engineer Adam Steed tried sound files, film soundtracks, music and live speech in quiet and with competing sound from the theatre speakers. Mander reports good, unbroken reception through portable Auri receivers and several hearing aids, earbuds and headphones.", "The account gives no hearing aid model list, participant sample, fitting settings, firmware versions or measured intelligibility scores.", "The article says audiologists need to explain and activate loop programmes and that appointment time can prevent this; it provides no equivalent audit of Auracast activation.", "The article identifies itself as a reprint from the British audiology association’s Audacity magazine; this record dates the September 2025 BATOD edition that was read." ], "limitations": "Informal observations by an audiologist involved in the installation, with manufacturer involvement and financial support unspecified. Two named evaluators are described, but no recruited listener sample or protocol. Device-availability statements and forecasts elsewhere in the article are not verified by this account and are not used as a current device list.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "hmcts-2025-court-tribunal-design-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hmcts-2025-court-tribunal-design-guide/", "title": "Court and Tribunal Design Guide, version 3.1", "authors": "HM Courts & Tribunals Service", "publisher": "HM Courts & Tribunals Service (GOV.UK)", "date": "2025-08-13", "kind": "Court design standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (HM Courts & Tribunals Service, an agency of the Ministry of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/689c56779a65499b44636190/court-and-tribunal-design-guide-V3.1.pdf", "summary": "The standards for refurbishing and building court and tribunal buildings in England and Wales, including hearing enhancement systems, microphones and acoustic privacy.", "findings": [ "Says hearing enhancement systems should be provided at HMCTS sites in accordance with industry standards and current legislation, and that the audio enhancement in each hearing room must include systems to assist hearing-impaired people.", "Lists hearing enhancement systems and microphones among the technology requirements of hearing rooms, with microphones and screens for the judiciary, legal advisers, clerks, court associates, advocates, witnesses and defendants, and access to microphones for probation and youth justice teams.", "Its mechanical and electrical data sheets mark an induction loop for hearing rooms, reception, consultation rooms, waiting areas, the open justice viewing area, video link rooms and video hearing booths, and a hearing enhancement system, technology not named, for the jury assembly room, jury retiring room and meeting rooms.", "Asks for clear and visible signs for hearing enhancement systems, and for a hearing enhancement system at reception desks when existing buildings are refurbished.", "Treats speech clarity in hearing rooms and privacy between adjoining areas as the prime acoustic aims, and asks for hearing rooms to have sound separation from adjacent rooms and circulation routes." ], "limitations": "Design guidance for HMCTS buildings: it sets no performance figures for hearing enhancement systems, leaves the amplification specification to detailed design, says nothing about keeping loops in neighbouring rooms apart, and does not mention infrared listening systems, Bluetooth or Auracast. Many data-sheet entries are left to be decided project by project.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "sobek-dobyan-2025", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sobek-dobyan-2025/", "title": "MarkeTrak 2025: Hearing Aids in the Age of OTCs and Wearables", "authors": "Sobek Dobyan B, Powers TA", "publisher": "Hearing Review 32(4):8-14 (July/August 2025 issue)", "date": "2025-08-13", "kind": "Paper (trade-journal summary of an industry consumer survey)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Trade body (MarkeTrak is commissioned by the Hearing Industries Association, the US hearing aid industry's association; the first author is HIA's executive director and the second runs a consultancy serving the hearing health industry)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://hearingreview.com/inside-hearing/research/marketrak-2025-hearing-aids-in-the-age-of-otcs-and-wearables", "summary": "First results of MarkeTrak 2025, the US hearing aid industry's consumer survey, including the features hearing aid owners say their devices have.", "findings": [ "Of hearing aid owners who bought in the previous five years (n=887), 24% said their hearing aid has a telecoil, 47% said it does not and 29% were not sure. The question describes the telecoil as being for the telephone or public places with a hearing loop.", "The authors report that owners' knowledge of several features, telecoils among them, fell compared with MarkeTrak 2022.", "Wireless capability (direct smartphone streaming, linking, or streaming through an accessory) rose from 63% of owners in 2022 to 70%, and 54% have a downloadable app, up 10 points.", "Owners ranked volume control, rechargeability, a downloadable app and direct smartphone streaming as the four most impactful features.", "The Examining Hearing Difficulty section describes an online survey fielded by Az Marketing Research in October and November 2024 across 16,148 US households, balanced and weighted to census characteristics; 2,955 people with self-reported hearing difficulty answered the detailed part, 1,173 of them hearing aid owners." ], "limitations": "An industry-commissioned survey summarised by HIA's own director; the full data were to be published later in Seminars in Hearing. Features are self-reported, and the telecoil figure is in a table image rather than the text. It does not ask about Auracast or venue assistive listening systems.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "listener-reach" ] }, { "id": "nj-2025-communication-access-awards", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nj-2025-communication-access-awards/", "title": "New Jersey Human Services Awards Additional Grants to Improve Access to County Services for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals", "authors": "New Jersey Department of Human Services", "publisher": "New Jersey Department of Human Services", "date": "2025-07-31", "kind": "Press release (government grant awards)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Government (New Jersey Department of Human Services, Division of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.nj.gov/humanservices/news/pressreleases/2025/approved/20250731.shtml", "summary": "New Jersey announced nearly US$350,000 for five counties, with planned purchases including room, counter and portable loops, listening receivers and radio-frequency headsets.", "findings": [ "The 31 July 2025 announcement describes a third round of communication-access grants to five counties, following rounds in 2022 and 2024.", "Bergen County received US$70,000 for three stationary loops, two audio systems and twelve loop listeners for Ridgewood; Mercer received US$69,355 for four undercounter loops, four portable kits and two large-room loops.", "Middlesex County received US$70,000 for a programme including a loop at South Brunswick’s new 130-seat theatre, RF headsets at two Woodbridge library branches and a loop at Piscataway’s Westergard library.", "Passaic County received US$70,000 for portable loops at county historic sites and a large-room loop with rechargeable listeners and charging stations. Monmouth’s US$70,000 award mixed loops with other communication-access measures." ], "limitations": "Award announcement describing intended purchases, without completion checks or installation performance. County awards include mixed equipment and services; their totals are not unit prices or hearing-loop-only costs. It does not announce a 2026 application round.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2025-range-handout", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2025-range-handout/", "title": "What's the range of Auracast broadcast audio?", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2025-07-28", "kind": "Handout", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/2312_CES_Handout-Images_FINAL-range.pdf", "summary": "A one-page SIG handout comparing the range of paired Bluetooth audio with Auracast broadcasts; the SIG links it as its answer on transmitter coverage.", "findings": [ "Gives about 10 m for a paired Bluetooth Classic audio connection and about 100 m for an Auracast broadcast.", "Attributes the longer reach to mains-powered public transmitters that can raise their transmit power and use a more sophisticated antenna." ], "limitations": "No test conditions, receiver, power level or room are given. The handout is undated; the date shown is the PDF file's creation date, and the file name refers to a CES handout.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "real-range" ] }, { "id": "listen-2025-listenwifi-app", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2025-listenwifi-app/", "title": "ListenWIFI (App Store listing, version 5.4.1)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Apple App Store (seller: Listen Technologies Corporation)", "date": "2025-07-21", "kind": "Manufacturer app store listing", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the ListenWIFI and Listen Everywhere Wi-Fi systems; the listing and its privacy label are written by the developer)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://apps.apple.com/us/app/listenwifi/id1391914337", "summary": "Listen Technologies' App Store listing for ListenWIFI, the app through which listeners hear a ListenWIFI or Listen Everywhere venue's audio on their own iPhone or iPad.", "findings": [ "Says the phone must be connected to the venue Wi-Fi network where the system is installed, and recommends wired headphones or neck loops \"to avoid audio delay\" from Bluetooth products. It lists use with headphones, neck loops or hearing aids, channel QR codes, and automatic channel changes from location beacons.", "Requires iOS 11.0 or later. The privacy label, which the developer writes and Apple has not verified, states that usage data may be used to track users across other companies' apps and websites, and that location (precise and coarse) and usage data may be collected without being linked to the user's identity; the purposes listed include product personalisation and advertising data.", "Notes that the app may use location even when it is not open, which can decrease battery life.", "The version history records fixes for iPhone 14 models that could not stream (May 2023), for connecting to servers without internet access \"under specific network conditions\" (July 2024) and for crashes when connecting to servers on certain networks (August 2024). Version 5.4.1 added QR codes that take a new user from download straight to a channel." ], "limitations": "A developer's self-written listing, read on 9 October 2026; listings and privacy labels change with each release. The date is the release of version 5.4.1, the newest in the listing's version history. The developer's declarations differ between stores: its Google Play listing (version 5.4.7, updated 17 July 2025, Android 8.0 or later) states that the app collects no data and shares none with third parties, and its privacy policy (last modified 2 July 2024) says location is used, with the app open or in the background, only to trigger audio from venue beacons, and is not stored or shared. User reviews on the listing were not used.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks", "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "efhoh-2025-hands-off-telecoil", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/efhoh-2025-hands-off-telecoil/", "title": "Hands Off Our Telecoil! (campaign page)", "authors": "European Federation of Hard of Hearing People (EFHOH)", "publisher": "EFHOH", "date": "2025-07-15", "kind": "Advocacy campaign page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (European federation; EFHOH states that its 2024-2026 publications are co-funded by the EU CERV programme)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://efhoh.org/resources/campaigns/hands-off-our-telecoil/", "summary": "EFHOH's campaign against removing telecoils from hearing devices, reaffirmed at its 2025 annual general meeting, with calls to makers, hearing professionals, venues and policymakers.", "findings": [ "States that \"Auracast™ is not ready yet\" and that removing telecoils now would cut people off from proven access in public places before newer features are integrated, widely available and affordable.", "Asks makers, policymakers and professionals to ensure telecoils and Auracast coexist for at least the next 10 to 15 years, and makers to keep telecoils so that users connect to loops \"without the need for additional receivers\".", "Asks venues and building planners to maintain existing hearing loops and assistive listening systems, and to consult hard-of-hearing organisations before refurbishment and installation plans.", "Asks policymakers to keep existing assistive listening systems in accessibility requirements until Auracast assistive listening has matured and has a large enough user base.", "Asks audiologists to explain both technologies, encourage devices with both, and activate telecoils and Auracast where devices have them." ], "limitations": "A campaign statement without data. The date is the page's last update; the campaign began in October 2024 and was reaffirmed at the 2025 annual general meeting.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "california-2025-cbc-religious-facilities", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/california-2025-cbc-religious-facilities/", "title": "2025 California Building Code (Title 24, Part 2), Chapter 11B: 11B-219 Assistive listening systems, 11B-244 Religious facilities and 11B-706, with the Chapter 2 definitions", "authors": "California Building Standards Commission (Chapter 11B accessibility provisions of the Division of the State Architect)", "publisher": "International Code Council (ICC Digital Codes), for the California Building Standards Commission", "date": "2025-07-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "State building code", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (State of California, California Building Standards Commission; the printed and online code is published by the International Code Council)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CABC2025P1/chapter-11b-accessibility-to-public-buildings-public-accommodations-commercial-buildings-and-public-housing", "summary": "California's accessibility code, which counts a religious facility as a place of public accommodation, requires religious facilities to be accessible under the code, and sets its own assistive listening rules for assembly areas.", "findings": [ "The Chapter 2 definition of a place of public accommodation lists \"A religious facility\" among its categories, and defines a place of religious worship as a building or part of one intended for the performance of religious services.", "Section 11B-244.1 states: \"Religious facilities shall be accessible in accordance with the provisions of this code\"; where areas in a religious facility have more than one use, each part must meet the requirements for its use.", "Section 11B-219.2 requires an assistive listening system in assembly areas, including conference and meeting rooms, except for systems used only for paging or background music. Chapter 2 defines assembly areas as places for entertainment, educational or civic gatherings or similar purposes; its list of examples does not name worship spaces.", "Section 11B-219.3 sets receivers at 4% of the total number of seats, never fewer than two, and at least 25% of them (no fewer than two) hearing-aid compatible through neckloops. Receivers may be pooled across assembly areas in one building under one management if every receiver works with every system, and the hearing-aid-compatible minimum is dropped where an induction loop serves all seats.", "Section 11B-219.5 requires a permanently installed system where an area accommodates at least 50 people or has an audio-amplification system, and has fixed seating; a portable system may serve more than one conference or meeting room, with outlets or wiring provided for it. Where a system serves only some seats, they must be within 50 feet (15 m) of the stage and have a complete view of it (11B-219.4).", "Section 11B-216.10 requires a sign at or near each assembly area entrance reading \"Assistive-Listening System Available\" with the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss, or signs at ticket offices instead; section 11B-706 sets the same receiver jack, 110 to 118 dB SPL, 18 dB signal-to-noise and 18 dB peak-clipping limits as the 2010 ADA Standards.", "Chapter 11B does not mention Bluetooth, Auracast or Wi-Fi." ], "limitations": "Applies in California to building permit applications made on or after 1 January 2026, the effective date the Commission set for the 2025 edition, which it published on 1 July 2025; it governs new construction and alterations, and how local enforcing agencies apply 11B-219 to sanctuaries was not checked. The initial reading used UpCodes because the ICC viewer did not display the text. This audit checked Chapter 11B against the archived official Division of the State Architect 2025 CBC Advisory Manual, https://www.dgs.ca.gov/-/media/Divisions/DSA/Publications/access/2025-CBC-Advisory-Manual-Triennial.pdf, which reproduces code provisions alongside separately labelled advisories. The Chapter 2 definitions were not re-audited here.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "sennheiser-accentum-auracast-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sennheiser-accentum-auracast-manual/", "title": "ACCENTUM True Wireless instruction manual, version 07/25 A03", "authors": "Sonova Consumer Hearing GmbH", "publisher": "Sennheiser / Sonova Consumer Hearing GmbH", "date": "2025-07-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sonova Consumer Hearing GmbH, maker of Sennheiser consumer headphones)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://cdn.sennheiser-hearing.com/product-documents/product-downloads/accentum-true-wireless/Instruction%20manual%20Accentum%20True%20Wireless/Instruction_manual_Accentum_True_Wireless.pdf", "summary": "Instructions for selecting and switching Auracast broadcasts with ACCENTUM True Wireless earbuds.", "findings": [ "Page 20 illustrates a Smart Control list containing stream names with language suffixes. Pages 23-24 describe automatic discovery or QR selection, a tick for a selected transmitter, an active-audio indicator and a lock for password protection.", "Page 24 says that when several subscribed transmitters send audio at once, the last active one is played; the user can instead select a transmitter manually.", "Pages 24-25 describe automatic reconnection when returning within range and unsubscribing to prevent it." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer instructions and an illustrative diagram, not a test of language subgroups or hearing aids. Its connection terminology does not establish an acknowledged link to a broadcast transmitter or simultaneous mixing of programmes. The cover gives version 07/25 A03.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "auri-2025-tx2n-datasheet", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/auri-2025-tx2n-datasheet/", "title": "Auri TX2N / TX2N-D transmitter datasheet", "authors": "Listen Technologies and Ampetronic (Auri)", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "2025-07-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer datasheet", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies and Ampetronic)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/wp-content/uploads/UP3B603-2_Auri_TX2N_Transmitter_Datasheet.pdf", "summary": "Specifications of a two-radio installed Auracast transmitter, including output power by region, latency, sample rates and input processing.", "findings": [ "Maximum output power is +20 dBm in North America and +10 dBm in the rest of the world, adjustable from the regional maximum down to -10 dBm.", "Page 2, Audio Processing, states end-to-end latency with the maker's RX1 receiver of 29 to 45 ms, depending on sample rate and mono or stereo; internal line-in to line-out latency is 13 ms. Other receivers \"will vary\". The datasheet gives no latency measurement procedure.", "Offers 16 and 24 kHz (Auracast Standard) and 48 kHz (Auracast High), with stated internal responses of 50 Hz to 7.5, 11 and 22.5 kHz respectively.", "Has switchable AGC with a 20 dB control range and a switchable 24 dB per octave low-cut filter (75, 110 or 220 Hz by sample rate). The line input clips at +16 dBu and the microphone input at -25 dBu.", "Additional transmitters can take a stream from another TX2N over the network (multicast RTP) at a nominal 5 ms network latency." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer specifications, not independent measurements. Latency through hearing aids, phones or other receivers is not given.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "delay", "real-range", "large-venues", "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "usda-community-facilities-funding", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/usda-community-facilities-funding/", "title": "Community Facilities Direct Loan & Grant Program", "authors": "USDA Rural Development", "publisher": "US Department of Agriculture", "date": "2025-07-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Government funding programme guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (US Department of Agriculture, Rural Development)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/community-facilities/community-facilities-direct-loan-grant-program", "summary": "USDA describes loans and competitive grants for essential rural community facilities, including equipment, with eligibility limited by applicant, place and income.", "findings": [ "Eligible applicants include public bodies, community-based nonprofit corporations and federally recognised Tribes; eligible rural communities have no more than 20,000 residents. Private commercial or business undertakings are outside its definition of essential community facilities.", "Funds can purchase, construct or improve essential facilities, buy equipment and pay related project expenses. Examples include town halls, courthouses, community centres, museums and libraries; assistive listening is not specifically named.", "Maximum grant shares are 75%, 55%, 35% or 15% of eligible project costs according to population and median household income. The 75% tier requires population of 5,000 or fewer and income below the higher of the poverty line or 60% of the state nonmetropolitan median household income. Funds must be available.", "Applicants must be unable to fund the project from their own resources or commercial credit on reasonable terms, show substantial community support and complete an acceptable environmental review.", "The archived page says applications are accepted year round and asks applicants to discuss the specific project with the local Rural Development office before applying." ], "limitations": "Read through a Wayback Machine capture of 1 January 2026 because direct USDA requests returned 403. Date is the captured page’s exact modification date in structured metadata, 1 July 2025. This older copy cannot establish the October 2026 application window, rates or fund balance. General capital funding guidance does not establish eligibility of a specific listening installation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "sia-2025-prsia500-draft", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sia-2025-prsia500-draft/", "title": "prSIA 500:2025-07 Hindernisfreie Bauten (obstacle-free buildings), consultation draft", "authors": "SIA (Swiss Society of Engineers and Architects)", "publisher": "SIA; consultation copy with highlights published by Pro Audito Schweiz (in German)", "date": "2025-07-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Draft national standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (SIA)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/wp-content/uploads/prSIA500_Vernehmlassungsentwurf-mit-Hervorhebungen.pdf", "summary": "The consultation draft of the Swiss standard for obstacle-free buildings, intended to replace SIA 500:2009. Its section 7.8 sets requirements for assistive listening systems, including Auracast.", "findings": [ "Requires assistive listening systems to use Auracast transmitters as well as inductive transmission, preferably a fixed loop to EN 60118-4 and otherwise receivers with neckloops. Infrared and FM may be used where eavesdropping must be prevented.", "Sets a minimum STI of 0.7, and asks that all seats lie within the reception area where possible. If not, as many seats as possible and at least 20% (also 20% of each seat category) must be covered, placed near the stage with a view of it.", "States that the time difference between speech signals of similar level, such as room sound and the assistive signal, should where possible not exceed 30 ms and must not exceed 40 ms. Near the stage, or with a video image of the talker, the lip-to-audio difference should preferably stay within 50 ms.", "For FM, infrared and Auracast, operators must provide receivers with neckloops (guide value at least 4, or 5% of seats from 100 seats), simple headphones should be available, and field strength and frequency response measured through the neckloop must meet EN 60118-4.", "Requires an acceptance report showing that the system works and meets the requirements, and a receiver with headphones for the operator's own checks.", "Proposed sections 7.8.2 and 7.8.5 require use information at every visitor entrance. If reception is partial, visitors must be told which seats are suitable, using an entrance plan or seat pictograms; loop seats exceeding the referenced magnetic-noise recommendation do not count as covered.", "Proposed section 7.8.7 makes receiver quantity depend on building use and requires allowance for a high expected number of hearing-aid users, alongside its guide values of four receivers or 5% of visitor seats from 100 seats." ], "limitations": "A consultation draft (comments closed 3 October 2025). The draft states that it has no validity and must not be applied, and the final standard may differ. Swiss scope only. The linked copy carries Pro Audito's highlighting.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "commissioning-tests", "privacy", "loop-verification", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "loop-and-auracast", "places-of-worship", "neckloops", "courts-and-chambers", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "cochlear-2025-baha-7", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cochlear-2025-baha-7/", "title": "Cochlear introduces the Baha 7 Sound Processor and Baha SoundBand", "authors": "Cochlear", "publisher": "Cochlear Professional News (Cochlear Americas)", "date": "2025-06-02", "kind": "Manufacturer press release", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Cochlear)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://pronews.cochlear.com/cochlear-introduces-the-baha-7-sound-processor-and-baha-soundband/", "summary": "Cochlear's announcement of the Baha 7 bone conduction sound processor, which it presents as the first bone conduction processor with Bluetooth LE Audio and Auracast.", "findings": [ "Announces the commercial release of the Baha 7 Sound Processor, which Cochlear describes as the first in bone conduction to enable Bluetooth LE Audio and Auracast broadcast audio streaming, with US availability in late summer 2025.", "States that, as venues adopt Auracast, Baha 7 users can access audio streams in places such as theatres, concert halls, lecture halls and airports \"through an LE Audio-enabled smartphone\".", "Footnotes that a sound processor firmware update will be required to use certain features as LE Audio devices become available, and that Auracast capability is subject to third-party adoption of the Auracast protocol.", "Quotes a Cochlear marketing manager who expects Auracast to become the new standard for public and group listening over time.", "Also announces new Bluetooth LE Audio accessories. The release does not mention a telecoil." ], "limitations": "A maker's announcement of its own product. It reports no test of Auracast reception, range or delay with the processor, and its footnotes leave some LE Audio features to a later firmware update. US release; availability elsewhere may differ.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "hindernisfreie-architektur-2025-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hindernisfreie-architektur-2025-auracast/", "title": "Höranlagen heute und morgen. Was ändert sich mit der neuen Technologie Auracast? (Hearing systems today and tomorrow: what changes with Auracast?)", "authors": "Hindernisfreie Architektur, the Swiss national centre for barrier-free architecture, with recommendations from Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "hindernisfreie-architektur.ch (in German)", "date": "2025-05-19", "kind": "Technical guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (donation-funded Swiss specialist centre)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://hindernisfreie-architektur.ch/fachinformation/hoeranlagen-heute-und-morgen-was-aendert-sich-mit-der-neuen-technologie-auracast/", "summary": "Swiss accessibility guidance on choosing between induction loops and Auracast for public buildings during the transition.", "findings": [ "Notes that SIA 500 has so far named induction as the preferred technology for hearing systems in public buildings, with FM or infrared plus receivers and neckloops as alternatives.", "Expects Auracast in most new hearing aids and headphones within two to three years, except very small models, and longer (about five years or more) for cochlear implants; with hearing aids kept for six years or more, it expects the move from induction to Auracast to take up to ten years, with hybrid solutions needed meanwhile.", "Says the first Auracast transmitters for fixed hearing systems have been available since early 2025, so experience rests on few installations, and that secure Auracast solutions for settings such as courtrooms were still in development.", "Reports Pro Audito's advice to plan for Auracast in every new project, ideally installed in parallel with a fixed induction loop; an Auracast-only system is acceptable where a loop is not feasible, provided mobile receivers with neckloops are visible, available and easy to use." ], "limitations": "Expert guidance and forecasts, not measurements. Swiss context; updated 19 May 2025, before the SIA 500 consultation draft appeared.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "future-proofing", "privacy", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-and-auracast", "lifetime-costs", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops", "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "oxford-diocese-2025-hearing-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/oxford-diocese-2025-hearing-loops/", "title": "Why would you go to church if you can't hear what's being said?", "authors": "Diocese of Oxford (with the Revd Hannah Lewis, Terry Dawes and John Trett)", "publisher": "Diocese of Oxford, Church of England", "date": "2025-05-19", "kind": "Guidance page (diocesan, for parishes)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (the Diocese of Oxford, advising its own churches; the advice comes from its Chaplain among Deaf communities and two deaf hearing-aid users, a churchwarden and a professional loop engineer; the diocese's council for the deaf offers grants towards loops)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.oxford.anglican.org/hearing-loops.php", "summary": "A diocese's advice to churches on hearing loops, drawn from two deaf hearing-aid users who rely on their churches' loops each week.", "findings": [ "Says loops are installed in most church buildings, but some were put in long ago and have since broken without being repaired, and asks churches to show a sign and to record their loop on the A Church Near You directory, which lets people filter churches by whether they have one.", "Quotes a user: \"No matter how good the loop, if it isn't switched on, or if speakers don't use the microphone correctly, it won't do anything!\" Adds that people who do not wear hearing aids cannot tell whether the loop works, and that not every user has the confidence to complain.", "Recommends simple test equipment that lets someone without hearing aids check the loop, and asking hearing-aid users for feedback.", "Says a sound system on its own can make things harder for many people with hearing loss because it amplifies all noise and often causes an echo; a loop brings the sound close, \"like the person speaking is standing next to you\".", "Notes that the loop may cover only the seating area and not, for example, the sanctuary, that looping the whole church is sometimes not feasible, and that leaders and volunteers should know the covered area, for instance from a simple diagram.", "Lists installation faults: a loop installed too high can lose the signal when heads are bowed in prayer, and a system designed for a home can cause problems in a large church; dust and electrical equipment or wires placed near the loop reduce its effectiveness or cause interference.", "Says many hearing aids and implants need the telecoil enabled by the audiologist, and people with mild to moderate loss may need to ask for a hearing aid with a telecoil.", "Says Oxford Diocese Council for the Deaf can offer grants towards installing, replacing or repairing hearing loops; gives no award ceiling or application deadline." ], "limitations": "Experience and advice from two users and a chaplain, with no measurements or counts; one of the users is a professional loop engineer. It does not discuss Auracast or other systems. The date is the page's last update (19 May 2025); the RNID figure of 12 million people with hearing loss is quoted from RNID.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship", "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2025-grace-lutheran-profile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2025-grace-lutheran-profile/", "title": "Auracast location profile - Grace Lutheran", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2025-05-16", "kind": "Case study article (trade-body venue profile)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by member companies and owner of the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-grace-lutheran/", "summary": "A church considered a new hearing loop but chose Auracast with loan receivers after finding loop cost a barrier, according to the Bluetooth SIG’s venue profile.", "findings": [ "Grace Lutheran Church in Woodstock, Illinois, accommodates about 300 people and previously used FM receivers with earpieces and neckloops; the profile says cost was a major barrier to replacing FM with a hearing loop.", "The church chose an Auri package with one transmitter, eight receivers, a charging rack, earpieces and neckloops, and retired its FM system after a trial and permanent installation.", "The profile quotes the church’s audio technician on favourable congregant reactions to the new receivers and describes future interest in direct reception through personal hearing devices.", "The Benefits section reports that congregants using receivers with telecoil hearing aids or earpieces found sound quality better than with the old FM system, and that users so far found the receivers easy to use; it gives no listener sample size or test method.", "A latency demonstration was being prepared; the profile publishes no latency results." ], "limitations": "A promotional trade-body account of one venue, with no prices, measured comparison, listener sample size or independent evaluation. The purchase decision concerns replacing FM and considering a new loop; no existing loop was removed. Reported listener reactions concern the old FM system and new Auracast receivers, with no listener comparison against a loop. Date comes from the SIG’s linked resource listing, which displays 16 May 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "samsung-2025-auracast-cathedral", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/samsung-2025-auracast-cathedral/", "title": "Auracast Transforms Cathedral Acoustics With Unmatched Audio Clarity", "authors": "Samsung Electronics", "publisher": "Samsung US Newsroom", "date": "2025-05-15", "kind": "Manufacturer announcement", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Samsung, describing an event with GN hearing aids and Samsung earbuds)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://news.samsung.com/us/global-accessibility-awareness-day-samsung-auracast-transforms-cathedral-acoustics-with-unmatched-audio-clarity/", "summary": "Samsung's cathedral event announcement includes separate lists of phones acting as Auracast assistants and transmitters, with One UI requirements.", "findings": [ "Describes a St Paul's Cathedral event using broadcasts received directly by Galaxy Buds3 Pro or GN hearing aids. It reports a pilot on 1 May and an event planned for 16 May 2025, without a participant count or quantitative listening results.", "Footnote 5 lists Auracast assistant support with One UI 6.1 or later for Galaxy S25, S25+, S25 Ultra; S24, S24+, S24 Ultra, S24 FE; S23, S23+, S23 Ultra, S23 FE; Z Fold6, Z Flip6, Z Fold5, Z Flip5, Z Fold4, Z Flip4; A56, A55, A54, A36; and XCover7 Pro. Tablets are also listed.", "Footnote 4 separately lists transmitter support, excluding S23 FE and omitting several assistant-listed phones. Assistant capability and transmission capability therefore have different model lists.", "Footnote 6 names Galaxy Buds3, Buds3 Pro and Buds2 Pro as receivers. The phone lists identify assistant or transmitter roles, without establishing phone-local reception and playback of broadcast audio." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer promotional material with a compatibility footnote, not an independent venue test. The event uses GN hearing aids but does not identify their models or test every listed assistant with hearing aids. One UI 6.1 is the general assistant condition; Google's March 2025 hearing-aid announcement instead names One UI 7 and Android 15. These conditions should retain their separate contexts.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "st-albans-dac-2025-hearing-disability", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/st-albans-dac-2025-hearing-disability/", "title": "Advisory Leaflet 9a: Hearing Disability", "authors": "Diocese of St Albans Diocesan Advisory Committee (with thanks to the Revd Martin Shaw)", "publisher": "Diocese of St Albans, Church of England", "date": "2025-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Guidance leaflet (diocesan advisory committee)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (the Diocesan Advisory Committee of the Diocese of St Albans, which advises the diocese's parishes on church buildings)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.stalbansdiocese.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Hearing-Disability-leaflet-9a.pdf", "summary": "A one-page leaflet advising parishes to keep their hearing loops working and checked, to guard against electrical interference, and not to discard a working loop when Auracast is offered.", "findings": [ "Says a well-run sound system helps most of a congregation but may not be enough for people with moderate to severe hearing loss, and that \"UK Equality legislation requires\" a loop's installation \"where reasonably possible\".", "Warns that a sound system operator who does not use loop-enabled aids cannot know directly whether the loop works, and suggests a suitable calibrated testing device or volunteer hearing-aid users to check it.", "Warns that electrical work, \"especially new LED lighting with dimming\", may cause interference, and asks churches to make sure the contractor does not leave them with it.", "Describes Auracast as a newer technology, developed with involvement from hearing-loss charities, that sound system contractors are likely to propose for new or upgraded installations, and calls it likely to be worthwhile in the long run.", "Advises against rushing: hearing-aid suppliers are only starting to offer Auracast, aids in use typically last five years or more, and whether NHS aids will include it is uncertain. \"So don't discard a working loop system just because you'd like to have Auracast\"; it says both can be used at the same time." ], "limitations": "A short advisory leaflet with no data or references; its statement of what equality law requires is the committee's own summary. It names no loop performance standard. Dated May 2025 on the leaflet; the file was created on 21 May 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "ndcs-2025-cinema", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ndcs-2025-cinema/", "title": "Cinema (advice for deaf children, young people and families)", "authors": "National Deaf Children's Society", "publisher": "National Deaf Children's Society (NDCS)", "date": "2025-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (National Deaf Children's Society, a UK charity for deaf children and their families)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.ndcs.org.uk/advice-and-support/all-advice-and-support-topics/travel-leisure-and-hobbies/cinema-theatre-and-live-events/cinema", "summary": "A UK deaf children's charity's advice on going to the cinema, including which listening systems UK cinemas use and where.", "findings": [ "Says most cinemas have technology installed for users of hearing aids and implants, and that two kinds of system may be found.", "Says many cinemas have a loop in public areas such as the ticket desk or refreshments counter, but that \"Unlike at the theatre, cinemas do not tend to use loop systems in the auditorium itself\", because loops may pick up sound from other screens.", "Describes the infrared system as a wearable receiver worn around the neck like a lanyard, used with the hearing aid's or processor's T-setting; some cinemas require the receiver to be booked in advance, while others lend one on request on the day.", "Says some infrared systems can be used with headphones or headsets from the cinema, which may suit people with mild or moderate deafness who do not usually wear hearing aids or implants." ], "limitations": "Consumer advice without data, references or a named author (full references are available on request). It describes UK practice in general and does not mention radio, Wi-Fi or Auracast. The date is the page's \"Last Reviewed\" month.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "theatreplan-2025-assistive-listening", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/theatreplan-2025-assistive-listening/", "title": "Assistive Listening - Demystified", "authors": "Lerman K (Theatreplan)", "publisher": "Theatreplan (news blog)", "date": "2025-04-29", "kind": "Article (theatre consultancy blog)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (Theatreplan, a UK theatre planning consultancy; written by its consultant Kit Lerman; no funding is stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://theatreplan.com/news/assistive-listening-demystified", "summary": "A UK theatre consultancy's overview of the assistive listening options for venues (loops, infrared, radio, Wi-Fi and Auracast), with the advantages and drawbacks it sees in each.", "findings": [ "Describes infrared as floodlights modulated at typically 2-3 MHz, picked up by battery-powered pendant receivers used with earphones or a neckloop, carrying several channels (for example a cinema's hard-of-hearing and audio description channels) and easily contained to one room because its transmission is line of sight.", "Says ambient infrared already gives users significant background noise, which would rise to \"unsustainable levels in sunlight\", so infrared should not be used in outdoor venues or venues with large windows.", "Says the signal needs line of sight, so many emitters are needed to cover every seat, and is blocked when patrons lean forward, adjust clothing or fold their arms; it adds a staffing overhead of charging, maintaining and supporting receivers, which is higher when more channels are offered.", "States that infrared audio is \"much lower in quality than an induction loop's\" because the system uses a subset of the audible frequency range, and that infrared is widely installed in the UK but draws nearly as many negative anecdotes as loops.", "On the other systems: loops typically cost five figures to install and carry one channel; radio systems are little used in the UK and, it says, cannot be contained or encrypted; the consultancy measured Wi-Fi latency of over 130 ms in some cases with standard phones, and puts a venue-supplied basic smartphone at about £700, about double a basic RF receiver.", "Calls Auracast new and unproven at scale, with latency less than half the typical latency of Wi-Fi systems, and expects it to spread across the sector.", "Notes that BS 8300 requires an assistive listening system to cover all audience areas, with provision for at least 4% of capacity in fixed-seat auditoria and at least 10% in flexible spaces." ], "limitations": "A consultancy blog post without references. The Wi-Fi latency figure is given without its method, and the statements on infrared are the author's assessment, not measurements. It describes UK practice.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "wifi-latency", "infrared-limits", "lifetime-costs", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "opus-2025-auraloop", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/opus-2025-auraloop/", "title": "AuraLoop: your hybrid kiosk (product page)", "authors": "Aura by Opus (Opus Technologies)", "publisher": "Opus Technologies", "date": "2025-04-18", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Opus Technologies)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://aurabyopus.com/en/auraloop/", "summary": "A maker's page for a desk unit that combines a small induction loop and an Auracast transmitter, with its specifications.", "findings": [ "Describes AuraLoop as the first hybrid product on the market, combining a magnetic induction loop and an Auracast transmitter in one desk unit, so that a listener at a reception desk receives the audio through a hearing device's T position or through Auracast.", "Lists an induction loop range of 3 m, an Auracast range of 30 m in free field at 3 dBm, a 16 kHz LC3 stream only, connection by QR code or password, automatic gain control, and battery or mains power.", "Claims sound quality \"without interference or latency\", without giving a latency figure for either path.", "States that 50% of hearing aids will have Auracast by 2026 and estimates 100% by 2030, without a source, and tells buyers: \"Don't choose one solution over another, choose both!\"", "The linked installation manual, V1.0, gives a magnetic-field range of 1.10 m in the technical specifications on printed p. 10. Printed p. 20 dates that manual to March 2025 and associates it with firmware v1.2.0. It supplies no range-test protocol or field-strength threshold at that distance. The archived French manual is linked at https://aurabyopus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Manuel-utilisation-Auraloop-V1.pdf." ], "limitations": "The maker's own marketing, with no test data. The maker's user manual (version 1.0, March 2025, firmware 1.2.0) gives the magnetic field range as 1.10 m and states that the unit meets the requirements of EN 60118-4, and it gives the battery life as both 4 and 10 hours; none of this is independently measured. The date is the page's last update (first published 10 July 2024).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "auri-2025-coverage-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/auri-2025-coverage-guide/", "title": "Auri coverage and install guide (application note UP3B609-01, rest-of-world edition)", "authors": "Listen Technologies and Ampetronic (Auri)", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "2025-04-17", "kind": "Manufacturer application note", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies and Ampetronic)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/wp-content/uploads/UP3B609-01_RoW_Auri-Coverage-and-Install-Guide.pdf", "summary": "A short application note on mounting Auri TX2N transmitters and checking coverage and audio quality during installation.", "findings": [ "States a coverage area of about 30 to 40 m in any direction for a received signal strength (RSSI) of -70 dBm on the maker's RX1 receiver, and says venue layout and the density of people, among other factors, influence performance.", "Shows ceiling and wall mounting orientations for flat floors and tiered seating, and notes that some venues will need other mounting options to be covered well.", "Recommends a site walk with an RX1 in commissioning mode (firmware 1.4) while the venue is empty, as a guide before transmitter locations are finalised.", "Recommends a quality-of-service test across the venue for each broadcast, with Wi-Fi and other systems running as in normal use.", "The guide names TX2N and TX2N-D transmitters on p. 1; its final page prints the document code 20250417 | UP3B609-01RoW. That code and the PDF creation metadata support the recorded date, rather than an independently stated publication date." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer guidance for its own transmitter and receiver. The note does not state the transmitter power, test venue or method behind the 30 to 40 m figure.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "signal-target", "interference", "commissioning-tests", "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "young-2025-hearing-loss-at-the-movies", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/young-2025-hearing-loss-at-the-movies/", "title": "The Experience of Hearing Loss at the Movies", "authors": "Young S (East Tennessee State University); faculty mentor Hite M", "publisher": "Boland Research Day 2025, East Tennessee State University (Digital Commons @ ETSU)", "date": "2025-04-16", "kind": "Conference poster abstract (survey and visits to cinemas)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (a doctoral student's poster in ETSU's Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology; funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://dc.etsu.edu/boland-research-day/2025/presentations/272", "summary": "A student study that checked the websites of 25 cinemas in Southeast Appalachia, contacted 24 of them about their accommodations for hearing loss and visited 14, with preliminary results only.", "findings": [ "Reviewed the websites and social media of 25 cinemas in the Southeast Appalachia region for advertised accommodations; some data could not be obtained for one of them after damage from Hurricane Helene.", "Contacted the other 24 by phone, email or in person to ask about accommodations and staff knowledge of their use, and at the 14 cinemas visited assessed how well the accommodations performed.", "Preliminary observations: closed caption devices and personal amplifier devices were the most common accommodations for people with hearing loss, and most cinemas had at least one type of accommodation but inadequate or no advertising or signage for it.", "Also measured sound levels at the 14 cinemas visited; levels seemed to stay within NIOSH and OSHA values, but the meter detected peaks above them." ], "limitations": "An abstract of a poster presented while analysis was still under way; the poster itself is not available, and the abstract gives no counts, no description of the devices or systems found and no findings on staff knowledge or device performance. One US region; sampling not described. Sound levels were measured with a phone app.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "sterkens-2025-hearingtracker-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sterkens-2025-hearingtracker-auracast/", "title": "\"Auracast is Here!\" Now What?", "authors": "Sterkens J", "publisher": "HearingTracker (opinion section)", "date": "2025-04-02", "kind": "Opinion article (with the author's own listening test)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (written by Juliëtte Sterkens, AuD, who according to the author profile has worked since 2012 as an advocate for hearing loops and other assistive technology with the Hearing Loss Association of America, with grant funding from the David and Carol Myers Foundation; published by HearingTracker, a consumer hearing-aid website)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingtracker.com/opinion/auracast-is-here-now-what", "summary": "A loop advocate's article on what Auracast means for hearing aid users and venues, including the author's own listening test in a church with an Auracast receiver and a neckloop.", "findings": [ "Describes a February 2025 test in a small Illinois church with an Ampetronic/Listen Auri transmitter at 50% power sending two streams: a lower bit rate for hearing aids and assistive listening, and a higher one for wireless earphones.", "The author listened with open-fit receiver-in-canal hearing aids, more than three years old, set to telecoil, through an Auri receiver with a neckloop, and reports with the lower-bit-rate stream \"great speech quality, similar to what I have experienced in well-installed hearing loops\".", "Reports that earbuds, an Auri receiver with headphones and ReSound Nexia hearing aids worked similarly, with little perceptible latency throughout the sanctuary.", "States that the ADA requires facilities with an assistive listening system to provide receivers with headphones, or neckloops for hearing aid users with telecoils, and that installing an Auracast transmitter without receivers \"will NOT meet the ADA requirements\".", "Calls for hearing instruments with both Auracast and telecoils, which the author calls \"ADA-Access-Ready\", and for push-button connection to broadcasts similar to switching to a telecoil." ], "limitations": "One listener in one room, with no measurements of field strength, frequency response or latency, and no statement of how the equipment was obtained. The author advocates hearing loops. The page was last modified on 14 April 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "medel-2025-auracast-ci", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/medel-2025-auracast-ci/", "title": "Can Cochlear Implants Receive Auracast Broadcasts?", "authors": "MED-EL", "publisher": "The MED-EL Blog", "date": "2025-04-02", "kind": "Manufacturer article", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (MED-EL)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://blog.medel.com/technology/can-cochlear-implants-receive-auracast-broadcasts/", "summary": "MED-EL's explanation of how users of its audio processors can receive Auracast through an add-on receiver.", "findings": [ "In the section on using AudioLink devices to receive broadcasts, MED-EL describes an accessory route for SONNET, SONNET 2, SONNET 3 and RONDO 3 cochlear-implant processors: a third-party Auracast receiver connected to AudioLink or AudioLink XT with a cable and adapter from the AudioLink Cable Kit. It does not map each processor to an AudioLink generation or explicitly rule out built-in Auracast reception.", "Names one third-party transceiver as its preferred option; choosing a broadcast and entering the password for an encrypted broadcast are done in that receiver's app.", "Says MFi and ASHA remain the most common protocols for streaming to hearing aids and that Auracast is still in the early stages of introduction." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer blog post from April 2025. It gives no timeline for built-in Auracast and reports no testing of the add-on route (latency, range or sound quality).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "abbey-theatre-2025-assistive-listening", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/abbey-theatre-2025-assistive-listening/", "title": "Assistive Listening System: Instructions for Audience Members", "authors": "Abbey Theatre", "publisher": "Abbey Theatre, Dublin", "date": "2025-04-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Venue guidance (operator's instructions for audiences)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (the Abbey Theatre, Dublin, writing for its own audiences about the system it installed, Sennheiser MobileConnect)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.abbeytheatre.ie/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Assistive-Listening-Manual-2025-2.pdf", "summary": "An 11-page guide from Dublin's Abbey Theatre to the new Wi-Fi assistive listening system in its auditorium: what to bring, how to join and what to do when the app stops.", "findings": [ "Introduces Sennheiser MobileConnect as the theatre's new assistive listening system, streaming over Wi-Fi to the audience's own phones, and asks for feedback because the system is new.", "Asks audience members to bring their own headphones, saying wired ones work best but Bluetooth also works, and lends a limited number of headphones from the box office against a refundable deposit.", "Says the app works with hearing aids and cochlear implants over Bluetooth, and tells people whose hearing aids lack Bluetooth to remove them when using the app; it does not mention neckloops or telecoils.", "Listeners join a dedicated, password-protected network for the system. The guide advises turning off the phone's automatic switching to the best Wi-Fi network, because the phone could change network during the show and the app would stop working.", "Advises against keeping the phone in a pocket or bag, saying this may affect the app, and tells listeners whose app stops during the show to reopen it and reselect the channel. Owners of older devices are pointed to another version of the app.", "Directs patrons who need help with the system to the box office or a member of staff." ], "limitations": "A venue's instructions, with no figures on use or reliability. The guide carries no printed date; the month comes from the PDF's creation date (3 April 2025) and the upload folder. It names the network and password, which are not repeated here.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2025-theatre-aarau", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2025-theatre-aarau/", "title": "Test report: Auracast assistive listening system in a theatre", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz (in German)", "date": "2025-03-17", "kind": "Field test", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/news/testbericht-auracast-hoeranlage-im-theater/", "summary": "A trial installation of one Auracast transmitter system in the Alte Reithalle of Bühne Aarau, covering reception, microphone placement and latency.", "findings": [ "A single transmitter in the roof structure, roughly in the middle of the room, was received at all seats of the hall of about 22 x 80 m. Whether this holds with hundreds of phones in the audience was not tested.", "Transmitter-to-receiver latency was 36 to 43 ms to receivers with neckloops, depending on configuration, and 56 to 58 ms to the hearing aids used, which the authors judged too long.", "Adding about 30 ms for the audio system and the sound path to a distant directional microphone gave a total of roughly 65 to 90 ms, which the authors call problematic for some seats, such as near the front with open or one-sided fittings.", "Intelligibility depended mainly on microphones close to the talker's mouth. Distant directional microphones gave insufficient intelligibility, and a listener near the front could hear better without the system.", "The introduction identifies the test system as Auri from Listen Technologies. The latency section identifies GN ReSound Nexia hearing aids and receivers with inductive neckloops; coverage is not mapped separately by receiver. The reception section leaves operation with hundreds of audience smartphones to be established in use and gives no audience count for the trial.", "The latency section identifies the hearing aids behind the 56-58 ms result as GN ReSound Nexia; it does not give an instrument or timing procedure.", "In the latency section, the warning about front seats and open or one-sided fittings is an explanation of where delay can be problematic, not a reported comparison of listener groups. The roughly 65–90 ms total spans neckloop-receiver and hearing aid paths after adding about 30 ms for the venue audio system or acoustic travel to the directional microphone." ], "limitations": "One room, one transmitter system and one hearing aid model (GN ReSound Nexia, named in the latency section); listener and audience counts unstated, with crowded operation untested. No comparison of fitting types or separate financial support is reported. Latency depends on the configuration and firmware at the time.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "real-range", "which-technology", "loop-and-auracast", "courts-and-chambers", "theatres-and-cinemas", "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "heinze-2025-samsung-auracast-code", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/heinze-2025-samsung-auracast-code/", "title": "CVE-2025-20908: Use of insufficiently random values in Samsung’s Auracast implementation", "authors": "Heinze D; Steinmetz F", "publisher": "ERNW, Insinuator.net", "date": "2025-03-13", "kind": "Technical research article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (ERNW security researchers; separate research funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://insinuator.net/2025/03/cve-2025-20908-use-of-insufficiently-random-values-in-samsungs-auracast-implementation/", "summary": "Researchers describe a weak default broadcast code in Samsung phones, a reported code-recovery demonstration, and the manufacturer's subsequent change to code generation.", "findings": [ "The default code in the examined implementation contained four hexadecimal characters representing only two random bytes. Users could choose a different code.", "The written demonstration describes a Galaxy S23 broadcast and an nRF5340 development kit, with recovery of the old default code reported in under a second. It is a single described demonstration, not a survey of venue transmitters.", "The researchers say Samsung changed the default to twelve hexadecimal characters representing six random bytes, and report a patch release on 4 March 2025.", "The authors connect possession of the code with potential stream takeover and recommend a random code using the available 16-character space. The reported demonstration establishes code recovery; it does not document takeover of an installed venue system." ], "limitations": "Read the complete article through the Wayback Machine after direct requests to the original domain failed DNS resolution. The embedded demonstration video was not watched; timings are attributed to the written account. The byline names Dennis Heinze and the article is signed by Frieder and Dennis. Funding is unstated. Personal phone broadcasting is used only as evidence about the shared broadcast-code mechanism; the result is not evidence that venue transmitters use the same defaults.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "plyler-2025", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/plyler-2025/", "title": "Effectiveness of Television Streaming on Cochlear Implant User Performance and Satisfaction in Quiet and in Noise", "authors": "Plyler PN, Wade M, Dimlich A, Hausladen J, Humphrey E", "publisher": "American Journal of Audiology 34(2):270-280", "date": "2025-03-13", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (repeated measures, small sample)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center; the full text, with any funding or conflict-of-interest statement, could not be read)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00204", "summary": "Compared listening through a TV streamer, with the implant microphones turned down by 6 dB or muted, against the cochlear implant alone, in quiet and in noise.", "findings": [ "Sixteen implant users (15 bilateral) were tested with audiovisual sentences (the Connected Speech Test) in quiet and at +5 dB SNR with a competing message, in three conditions: implant only, streaming with the implant microphones attenuated by 6 dB, and streaming with the microphones muted.", "In noise, speech understanding, clarity ratings and sound quality ratings differed across all three conditions: implant only was poorest, streaming with attenuated microphones better, and streaming with muted microphones best.", "In quiet, understanding and clarity were significantly better with the microphones muted than with the implant only or with attenuated microphones.", "Participants preferred both streaming options to the implant alone in noise, and the muted option in quiet; overall, streaming with attenuated microphones was preferred to the implant alone.", "The authors advise counselling implant users on adjusting the microphone settings when using a TV streamer." ], "limitations": "Read from the abstract only; the abstract does not name the streamer or processors. A personal TV streamer in a laboratory, cited here as evidence about a streamed input and its mix with the processor microphones, not about a venue system. Sixteen participants.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "nhsps-2025-primary-care-design-standards", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nhsps-2025-primary-care-design-standards/", "title": "Primary Care/Community Health Premises: Schedule of Standards and Minimum Design Requirements", "authors": "Gardiner & Theobald LLP, for NHS Property Services", "publisher": "NHS Property Services", "date": "2025-03-13", "kind": "Design requirements (property owner's standard for new and refurbished premises)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (NHS Property Services, a company owned by the Department of Health and Social Care; the document is kept for it by the consultancy Gardiner & Theobald LLP)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.property.nhs.uk/media/oecla1wz/nhsps-standard-health-design-standards.pdf", "summary": "NHS Property Services' minimum design requirements for the primary care and community health buildings it develops or redevelops in England, including fixed loops at receptions and waiting areas and portable loops for consultations.", "findings": [ "Requires a fixed induction loop in all waiting areas, receptions and large meeting rooms, and portable induction loops \"for transportation to private areas during consultations/examinations\", one for each reception desk.", "Its engineering section repeats that loops for hearing aid users serve the reception desk, waiting and sub-waiting areas and any group rooms, with one portable loop for each reception point, beside a public address system for each reception area, whose preferred form has a desktop microphone at each reception point.", "Says glazed screens at reception, where installed, must let patient and receptionist communicate easily without blocking sound, with a gap (usually 150 mm) to pass objects under the screen.", "Lists privacy at the reception desk (waiting seats not too close to the desk) and an interview room next to reception among the key points in designing reception and waiting areas, and asks for patient privacy and confidentiality through sound attenuation and room design, with acoustic tests of sample rooms." ], "limitations": "Requirements for NHS Property Services' own development and refurbishment projects in England, not a law or a national standard. It sets no loop performance figures, names no measurement standard for loops and does not mention other assistive listening technologies. Version 18 of the document, dated 13 March 2025 in its revision log; the cover says March 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "google-2025-auracast-hearing-aids", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/google-2025-auracast-hearing-aids/", "title": "Stream Auracast broadcasts directly to hearing aids with Android.", "authors": "Balaji Ganesan (Product Manager, Android)", "publisher": "Google, The Keyword blog", "date": "2025-03-13", "kind": "Manufacturer announcement", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Google)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://blog.google/feed/auracast-hearing-aids-earbuds/", "summary": "Google's March 2025 announcement of Android phone controls for receiving Auracast broadcasts directly in compatible hearing aids.", "findings": [ "Describes the phone enabling a direct connection between a broadcast and hearing aids, including broadcasts in public venues. It does not describe broadcast audio being decoded or relayed by the phone.", "Names Samsung Galaxy devices with One UI 7 and Android 15, and Pixel 9 devices running the Android 16 beta, paired with LE Audio hearing aids from companies such as GN Hearing and Starkey.", "Announces QR-code joining for Pixel 9 devices and says hearing-aid presets in phone settings can be applied to broadcasts." ], "limitations": "A dated manufacturer announcement, not a device-by-device compatibility test. It does not enumerate the Galaxy models, establish support for every hearing aid, or state the later stable Android release requirement. The Pixel OS condition was explicitly a beta at this date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "bruce-2025-icassp", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bruce-2025-icassp/", "title": "Opportunities and challenges for Bluetooth LE Audio assistive listening systems", "authors": "Bruce IC, Armstrong S, Bosnyak DJ, Tawfik H", "publisher": "IEEE ICASSP 2025 (McMaster University)", "date": "2025-03-12", "kind": "Peer-reviewed conference paper (review)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (McMaster University); funding not stated in the abstract", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP49660.2025.10889430", "summary": "Reviews how Bluetooth LE Audio with Auracast compares with loop, radio and infrared assistive listening, and discusses signal processing for level calibration and position-dependent delay.", "findings": [ "Notes that the recommended calibration of sound levels in Auracast transmitters and receivers mirrors the standard for calibrating hearing loops, but that loops are normally installed by trained professionals, while simple Auracast transmitters are likely to be set up by non-experts in many cases.", "Points out that in a large venue a loop installer can insert one delay to match the sound arriving at the looped area, whereas Auracast listeners are not confined to one position and so experience a range of acoustic delays.", "Discusses signal-processing approaches to level calibration and to variable audio delay in Auracast transmitters and receivers." ], "limitations": "Only the abstract was read; the full paper is behind a paywall. A review and discussion paper without new listening data.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "audio-level", "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-product-brand-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-product-brand-guide/", "title": "Brand Guide for Bluetooth Trademarks, 11 March 2025", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2025-03-11", "kind": "Program terms", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark; trademark licensing guidance)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Brand-Guide-and-Logos-English.zip", "summary": "The product brand guide links Auracast trademark use to qualification for a Public Broadcast Profile role and adds Standard Quality transmission requirements.", "findings": [ "Page 17 permits licensed Auracast trademark use for products that completed qualification and indicated in their submission that they implement and meet the requirements for the Public Broadcast Source, Public Broadcast Sink or Public Broadcast Assistant role.", "A product implementing the source role must let its end user configure a Standard Quality Public Broadcast Audio stream within an Auracast broadcast.", "For a source-role product marketed for public locations, Standard Quality must be the default when it is configured to transmit an Auracast broadcast. Examples include public address systems, assistive listening systems and commercial televisions.", "The page 17 footnote requires public locations marketing availability under the Auracast marks to provide a Standard Quality stream for every item of audio content they provide through Auracast.", "Page 17 describes permitted uses on products, packaging and promotional materials; it supplies no coverage, latency or acoustic output measurement for an installation." ], "limitations": "The cover dates the guide to 11 March 2025, although the ZIP URL contains 2022. The cover and page 17 were read; findings concern product licensing, not the separate venue registration agreement. The original ZIP and extracted PDF are archived.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "alles-2025", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/alles-2025/", "title": "Clinician Perspectives on Training and Implementation of Telecoils in Hearing Aids", "authors": "Alles M, La Fratta Z, Strickland E", "publisher": "Purdue University, Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences (poster presented at the ISHA Convention)", "date": "2025-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Conference poster (online survey of hearing care professionals)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Purdue University, Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences; the poster names a graduate assistantship with tuition remission and states no other relevant financial interests; the copy read is hosted by the Center for Hearing Access, a nonprofit advocacy group)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/Alles-EBP-Poster.pdf", "summary": "An online survey of hearing care professionals on how often they fit and verify telecoils, what they tell patients about them, and what stops them.", "findings": [ "The Effective Education Options chart distinguishes least helpful, helpful and most helpful ratings. The 71.3% for one-to-one counselling and 48.8% for an office loop demonstration are specifically the most helpful category, rated by clinicians; they are not measured patient-learning outcomes.", "Recorded 255 survey-link entries while recruiting hearing care professionals through social media, ASHA Special Interest Groups 9 and 11, and ASHA and Educational Audiology Association email lists over 14 weeks from August to November; at most 184 completed the survey, and 128 to 184 answered each question. 52.7% worked in private practices and clinics and 25.0% in hospitals and medical centres.", "Asked how often they fit hearing aids with a telecoil, 30.4% said always (\"Telecoils can be activated later at any time\"), 42.9% as needed after a needs assessment, 13.0% only if the patient asks, 2.7% never and 10.9% other.", "Asked whether they verify or validate the activated telecoil, 14.3% said always, 11.5% most of the time, 12.1% sometimes, 22.0% not often and 40.1% never.", "33.9% said they counsel on assistive listening systems, including telecoils, at the first hearing aid consultation, against 91.3% who discuss Bluetooth connectivity and streaming; 54.9% cover telecoil use at the fitting. Asked when they spend most time teaching the telecoil (more than one answer allowed), 57.9% named follow-up appointments, 47.5% when patients ask, 31.7% the fitting and 21.3% the consultation.", "The most chosen barriers to fitting and teaching telecoils were having to choose between a telecoil and rechargeability (33.7%), no hearing loop in the office for demonstration (30.2%), no hearing loops in the area (26.0%), no local venues with neckloop systems (21.3%), Auracast replacing telecoils soon (14.2%), no cosmetically appealing telecoil option from their main manufacturer (13.6%) and a main manufacturer that does not include telecoils (13.0%).", "Respondents named one-to-one counselling (71.3%) and in-office demonstration with an installed loop (48.8%) as effective ways to teach patients; comments said patients often do not read manufacturer materials or struggle with online support.", "Its conclusions state that 30.4% of respondents always include telecoils in hearing aids \"when size permits\".", "The Results paragraph below Methods says responses were captured when people clicked the survey link: 255 were recorded, at most 184 were completed, and individual questions had 128 to 184 answers. The 255 figure is therefore not a count of completed questionnaires." ], "limitations": "A poster, not a peer-reviewed paper. The sample is small and self-selected, with no response rate, and answers are self-reported practice. Percentages are read from the poster's text and charts. The year of fieldwork is not given (the project's ethics approval is numbered 2024). The date and venue come from co-author Zachary La Fratta's CV, which lists the poster as presented at the ISHA Convention in March 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting", "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "samsung-2025-auracast-security-update", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/samsung-2025-auracast-security-update/", "title": "Samsung Mobile Security: SMR-MAR-2025, SVE-2024-2271 (CVE-2025-20908)", "authors": "Samsung Mobile", "publisher": "Samsung Mobile Security", "date": "2025-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer security bulletin", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Samsung, reporting a vulnerability and patch for its own devices)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://security.samsungmobile.com/securityUpdate.smsb?year=2025&month=03", "summary": "Samsung's March 2025 bulletin records an Auracast random-value weakness in its Android 14 and 15 software and states that the maintenance release improves random-value generation.", "findings": [ "The March 2025 entry identifies SVE-2024-2271 as CVE-2025-20908 and lists Android 14 and 15 as affected versions.", "Samsung says insufficiently random values before SMR Mar-2025 Release 1 let a nearby attacker access an Auracast broadcast. It states that the patch improves the use of random values.", "The bulletin rates the issue Moderate, records a report date of 4 December 2024, and credits Frieder Steinmetz and Dennis Heinze." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer account of its own software. The bulletin describes unauthorized access, without a measured stream-takeover result, installed venue tests or a list of affected venue transmitters. Month precision comes from the maintenance-release heading; the earlier report date is not its publication date. The returned page includes the year's other bulletins; only the March introduction and relevant entry were used.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "norway-2025-melhus-penalty-review", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/norway-2025-melhus-penalty-review/", "title": "Sak 2023/186: behandling av søknad om nedsettelse av ilagt tvangsmulkt (25.02.2025)", "authors": "Diskrimineringsnemnda", "publisher": "Diskrimineringsnemnda (Norwegian Anti-Discrimination Tribunal)", "date": "2025-02-25", "kind": "Regulatory enforcement (tribunal decision)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Norwegian Anti-Discrimination Tribunal)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.diskrimineringsnemnda.no/media/v21htbyh/sak-2023-186-nemndas-behandling-av-soeknad-om-nedsettelse-av-ilagt-tvangsmulkt.pdf", "summary": "A follow-up to Norway’s Melhus hearing-loop order records late completion and refuses to reduce the coercive penalty, rejecting the municipality’s explanations for delay.", "findings": [ "The decision identifies Melhus municipality and Midt medical centre as the subjects of the 6 May 2024 order in case 2023/186, requiring working hearing loops by 15 June 2024.", "Page 2 records that no completion evidence arrived at the deadline and the chair activated the daily penalty from 17 June 2024. The order was fulfilled on 28 October 2024, so the penalty ran through 27 October 2024.", "The municipality applied on 10 December 2024 for a reduction, citing misdirected email, supplier and municipal holidays, and technical adjustments to the equipment.", "Pages 3-5 reject those explanations as special grounds for reduction. The tribunal said the municipality had known about the complaint for a year, had not kept the tribunal informed, and had not documented the claimed delay periods. Equipment was ordered on 2 July 2024, seventeen days after the deadline.", "The operative decision of 25 February 2025 refuses the application to reduce the penalty. The document specifies the daily rate of NOK 3,000 including Saturdays but does not state a total amount or confirm payment." ], "limitations": "A Norwegian-language follow-up decision about reducing a coercive penalty, not a new finding about system quality. It records fulfilment of the installation order but publishes no field-strength measurements, listener results, total penalty or proof of payment. English findings are paraphrases of the original.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "complaints-and-cases" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2025-qr-paper", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2025-qr-paper/", "title": "A new Bluetooth audio scan-to-listen experience", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Market Development", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2025-02-17", "kind": "Paper", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/02.20.25_Auracast_QR_Paper_FINAL.pdf", "summary": "A SIG paper on using QR codes to join Auracast broadcasts in bars, museums, transport, theatres and for private listening.", "findings": [ "States that in most cases one transmitter will cover a whole venue, citing a Lincoln Center demonstration in which one small transmitter covered all 1,085 seats of Alice Tully Hall.", "Venues that limit listening, such as cinemas, theatres and meetings, can encrypt the broadcast and put the code in a QR code shown on a screen or electronic shelf label that changes with each showing or meeting.", "A theatre ticket can carry both the ticket code and the broadcast data, and the same broadcast code can be displayed at each auditorium entrance.", "Says the ability to use a QR code with Auracast will make it easier for listeners to choose what they want to hear, and calls the applications it describes simple to deploy." ], "limitations": "An overview written to promote the feature. The Lincoln Center demonstration is reported without method, measurements, receivers used or whether the hall was occupied.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "finding-and-joining", "privacy", "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2025-operator-guidance", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2025-operator-guidance/", "title": "Can Bluetooth Auracast be used as an assistive listening system?", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz (in German)", "date": "2025-02-17", "kind": "Operator guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/news/kann-bluetooth-auracast-als-hoeranlage-eingesetzt-werden/", "summary": "Guidance for venue operators, installers and building advisers in Switzerland on running Auracast alongside inductive systems.", "findings": [ "Prefers a fixed induction loop plus an Auracast transmitter. An Auracast transmitter with loaned neckloop receivers costs less, but the authors say it often does not work well enough in practice.", "Reports that all FM, infrared and Auracast systems tested so far reached the required magnetic field strength at the ear through a neckloop only with the transmitter fully driven and the receiver volume near maximum. It recommends an automatic gain control or fast peak limiter before the transmitter to keep the signal about 1-3 dB below clipping.", "Gives Auracast latency as about 30-40 ms, more for some transmitter-receiver pairs, plus up to 20 ms or more in the audio system, and notes that no maximum tolerable latency had yet been set.", "Estimates that the roughly 100 m range given in data sheets for 20 dBm transmitters could fall to 20-30 m under extreme conditions, and suggests mounting transmitters high on a wall or centrally on the ceiling, with several transmitters for large areas.", "Expects many systems to need a PIN because most people will soon be able to receive streams inside and outside the room, and notes open questions on PIN length (four digits are easy to guess), changing it and sharing it.", "Says room signs should give the stream name and any PIN, and that Swiss law does not require an acceptance report although builders and authorities usually ask for one.", "Says a loop plus Auracast costs more because two systems must be installed, and that Auracast with loaned neckloop receivers brings extra work in staff training and visitor information.", "The section on magnetic field strength at the neckloop states that the measurements used a 1 kHz sine wave, with full transmitter drive and receiver volume usually at maximum. It gives no number of systems tested." ], "limitations": "Guidance from early practical experience, not a controlled study. The range figure is an estimate. The page bears a 17 February 2025 date but the archived text discusses the new SIA 500 draft; no revision date is stated, so the displayed date does not establish when every passage was written.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "audio-level", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "commissioning-tests", "finding-and-joining", "privacy", "listener-preference", "loop-verification", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "loop-and-auracast", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "rnid-2025-auracast-report", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-2025-auracast-report/", "title": "Auracast: a revolution in audio accessibility (RNID Auracast report)", "authors": "RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People)", "publisher": "RNID", "date": "2025-02-11", "kind": "Advocacy report", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (RNID, UK charity)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://rnid.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Final-Auracast-Report-110225.pdf", "summary": "A UK charity report on how Auracast could serve people who are deaf or have hearing loss, worked through six use cases, with recommendations for manufacturers, platform developers, the NHS, audiologists, venues and transport operators.", "findings": [ "The public transport Unknowns passage proposes comparing streamed announcements with sound received by hearing-device microphones, so an inaudible-in-the-room stream could trigger a warning or be ignored. This is a suggested response to spoofing, not a tested or required product feature.", "The Making Auracast accessible discussion (printed pages 16–17) calls for usability tests under real-world conditions and asks hearing-device makers to consider people without smartphones. The following Auracast in practice recommendations ask national infrastructure providers and venues to participate in pilot tests involving end users; the National infrastructure recommendations also call for testing Auracast with user groups.", "Expects the full rollout of Auracast to take up to 10 years, and asks venues with a hearing loop to keep testing and maintaining it for at least the next five years and potentially nearer 10.", "Recommends that new buildings install a hearing loop where feasible as well as an Auracast system. Where loops are impractical, it sees Auracast as a better choice than infrared or Wi-Fi because people will in time be able to use their own receivers.", "Notes that the Auracast specification sets interoperability but not the user interface. It warns that phone-based stream selection and password-protected streams risk excluding some people, and describes QR-code, NFC and on-device alternatives.", "The Introduction (page 3) describes Auracast’s potential to improve access while calling for inclusive design. Making Auracast accessible for everyone (page 13) says user-interface choices are left to product developers and warns of exclusion through inaccessible designs.", "Inclusive design and including users (page 16) recommends involving people who might otherwise be excluded, testing device usability under real-world conditions, and considering people without smartphones. Its recommendation to venues and national infrastructure is to participate in pilot tests involving end users.", "At a reception desk, it finds that a well-maintained hearing loop still gives people without a smartphone a simpler experience than an encrypted Auracast stream, and asks that hearing aids keep telecoils and desks keep loops until Auracast is equally simple.", "The Reception desk passage (page 28) contrasts a loop’s limited coverage and one-button access with the extra interaction needed to join an encrypted stream, such as scanning a QR code. The user-needs questions (page 32) say that brief interactions may reduce tolerance for difficulty joining a stream.", "For public transport it flags two untested risks: spoofed streams that mimic official announcements, and congestion when thousands of devices share the 2.4 GHz band. It says practical tests are needed.", "Cites a 2022 UK market survey in which only 15% of hearing aid users knew they had a telecoil, and notes that NHS hearing aids are usually replaced every three to four years.", "Printed pages 36 and 41 ask audiologists to help people set up prescription hearing devices for Auracast or signpost to suitably trained, accessible services. Page 41 also asks for telecoil activation to support the indirect route through a neckloop receiver.", "In its television use case (printed page 21), RNID notes that listeners may want to converse with other people while streaming television audio and proposes intuitive user control of the balance between Auracast and hearing aid microphone signals. This is a design recommendation, not a measured venue fitting target." ], "limitations": "A policy and design report with user quotes, not measurements. UK-focused (NHS supply, UK transport). Written in February 2025, when it expected operating-system support for Auracast on phones during 2025/26.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "interference", "future-proofing", "finding-and-joining", "privacy", "service-counters", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "infrared-limits", "loop-and-auracast", "lifetime-costs", "transport", "courts-and-chambers", "healthcare-settings", "using-each-system", "auracast-hearing-aid-setup", "broadcast-security", "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "sig-2025-legacy-phones", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-2025-legacy-phones/", "title": "Developing Auracast receivers with an assistant application for legacy smartphones", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Market Development", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (technical overview, version 1)", "date": "2025-02-06", "kind": "Technical guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Developing_Auracast_Receivers-Legacy_Smartphones.pdf", "summary": "Explains how earbuds, hearing aids, headphones and speakers can let people choose a broadcast from an app on a phone that has no built-in Auracast assistant.", "findings": [ "Section 2, pages 5-6, separates the assistant's control role from audio reception: the phone instructs the receiver to synchronize to the selected transmitter, and the receiver obtains the broadcast directly. In this topology the audio does not pass through the phone.", "Phones whose Bluetooth chips predate Core 5.2, or that lack an LE Audio host stack, cannot scan for broadcasts themselves. The receiver can scan instead and pass the list to a stand-alone app on the phone over an ordinary GATT connection, which the paper says almost every smartphone of the past ten years supports.", "Every Auracast receiver must be able to scan for broadcasts on its own, so where only one transmitter is in range, joining directly from the receiver may be enough.", "Urges makers of dual-mode receivers to implement broadcast reception first, so that users can join broadcasts without replacing their phone." ], "limitations": "Design guidance from the SIG's market development team. It describes how products can be built, not which products do so, and it names no phone platform; in practice this route depends on each receiver maker providing an app.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "finding-and-joining", "listener-reach", "using-each-system", "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "sig-2025-earbuds-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-2025-earbuds-guide/", "title": "How to design Auracast earbuds", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Market Development", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (technical overview, version 1.1)", "date": "2025-02-06", "kind": "Technical guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2403_Auracast_Earbuds.pdf", "summary": "Design principles for Auracast receivers, using earbuds as the example; the SIG says they apply equally to hearing aids, headphones, speakers and soundbars.", "findings": [ "All receivers must be able to render within a presentation delay of 40 ms, the default. Receivers built to the hearing aid (HAP) or telephony and media (TMAP) profiles should handle any value from 20 to 40 ms. A receiver given a value outside its range should use the nearest value it supports rather than reject the stream.", "When a transmitter sets the immediate-rendering flag for live content, ear-worn receivers should use their lowest supported delay; speakers and devices that render at a distance are advised not to support the flag.", "Receivers are not required to handle multiplexed streams or to down-mix left and right to mono, so a transmitter serving listeners who need mono should send a separate mono stream.", "The head absorbs 2.4 GHz signals strongly, so left and right earbuds or hearing aids cannot rely on a Bluetooth link between them; they stay on the same stream through an assistant or a proprietary link.", "A receiver can read from a broadcast's announcement whether it is encrypted and whether a 16 or 24 kHz stream is on air; if not, the user may need to ask for one. Receivers are expected to handle four retransmissions of each packet and should support packet loss concealment.", "Section 2.6.3 recommends receiving only the BISes needed for playback and switching the receiver off during other BIS transmissions to avoid needless battery use. It recommends a separate mono subgroup where mono is needed because stereo downmixing is optional." ], "limitations": "Design recommendations, not test results; how far shipping products follow them is not reported.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "large-venues", "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "australia-2025-hearing-augmentation-paper", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/australia-2025-hearing-augmentation-paper/", "title": "Hearing Augmentation Working Group – Research Paper", "authors": "Hearing Augmentation Working Group (chaired by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts)", "publisher": "Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts", "date": "2025-02-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Regulatory report (working group findings for the Transport Standards)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (Australian Government; the working group was chaired by the federal transport department, and its members were Deafness Forum Australia, Guide Dogs Australia, five state transport departments and authorities, and the Bus Industry Confederation)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/hearing-augmentation-working-group-paper.pdf", "summary": "Findings of a working group set up during the reform of Australia's Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport on current and emerging hearing augmentation, including how to move from hearing loops to Bluetooth broadcast systems such as Auracast.", "findings": [ "Finds the telecoil the most common hearing augmentation technology today and effective when used and maintained correctly, and says loops should be tested for electromagnetic interference before deployment and maintained every 6 to 12 months.", "Reports members' view that Bluetooth broadcast systems may be cheaper and easier to retrofit than hearing loops, because a loop may require renovating a building while installing transmitters may be less disruptive; it describes these systems as still in early development and trials.", "Encourages operators to trial new technologies with users and, if appropriate, to install them \"in tandem with induction loop hearing augmentation systems\".", "Says infrastructure for telecoils must continue to be maintained while the telecoil appears to be phased out of new hearing aids, that the rollout of new technology \"will take some time\", and that operators may need both loops and newer systems available at the same time; it notes that this matches EFHOH's position.", "Says designers can add emerging technology through the Transport Standards' equivalent access provisions, and that no equivalent access process would be needed where new technology is installed in addition to existing loops that meet the Standards.", "Asks that signage show which systems are available where Auracast is deployed, with instructions for passengers.", "Recommendation 8 asks to \"maintain infrastructure for older assistive listening systems while newer technologies are gradually integrated\"." ], "limitations": "Findings and recommendations for the government to consider in future reviews of the Transport Standards, not requirements; public transport only. It cites no measurements or costs. The department's server did not respond on 9 October 2026, so the paper was read from an archived copy of this URL; the cover says February 2025, while the file's metadata gives a creation date in February 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "transport" ] }, { "id": "waltham-forest-echo-2025-chamber-hearing", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/waltham-forest-echo-2025-chamber-hearing/", "title": "Tories slam council for ‘poor’ hearing levels in chamber", "authors": "Mann S (Local Democracy Reporter)", "publisher": "Waltham Forest Echo", "date": "2025-01-30", "kind": "News article (local democracy reporting)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (a local newspaper report by a Local Democracy Reporter)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://walthamforestecho.co.uk/2025/01/30/tories-slam-council-for-poor-hearing-levels-in-chamber/", "summary": "A report on residents and a councillor who could not hear a crowded committee meeting in a London borough's council chamber, where the council says two hearing loops are checked before every meeting.", "findings": [ "Reports that at a scrutiny committee meeting on 23 January 2025, with both levels of the public gallery full, residents interrupted several times to say they could not hear, although members speak one at a time into microphones connected to loudspeakers in the chamber and the gallery.", "Reports that a councillor who uses a hearing aid was struggling to hear an officer from a seat in the chamber.", "Reports the council's statement that two hearing loops cover the chamber and galleries and that each is checked before every meeting, and that the chair asked for quiet, moved people from the upper to the lower gallery and adjusted the volume.", "Reports that the council was looking at how to increase the amplification in the galleries, and that opposition councillors asked for a review of the audio systems \"particularly for individuals with hearing impairments\" and an updated hearing loop." ], "limitations": "A news report of one meeting, written during a political dispute. It does not say whether anyone used the loops or how they performed, and the council says heckling from the gallery added to the problem.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "mcweeny-2025", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/mcweeny-2025/", "title": "Evaluating a hearing loop implementation for live orchestral music", "authors": "McWeeny S, Trainor LJ, Armstrong S, Bosnyak D, Tawfik H, Bruce IC", "publisher": "Ear and Hearing 46(3):808-816", "date": "2025-01-27", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (live concert)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (McMaster University; AGE-WELL Canada grant); in-kind hearing aids and fittings from Sonova Canada", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39868727/", "summary": "Tested whether a hearing loop improved sound quality for hearing-aid users during a live orchestral concert by switching the loop feed every 5 minutes.", "findings": [ "20 adults with moderate-to-severe hearing loss used study hearing aids with telecoils, and 8 used their own hearing aids without a telecoil; all rated sound quality and naturalness during a Hamilton Philharmonic Orchestra performance.", "A temporary loop covered six rows in the upper balcony of a 2,200-seat hall, about 27 to 37 m from the stage.", "The loop carried a stage-microphone mix, the hall's balcony-microphone feed for its infrared system, or nothing. The no-feed condition was rated significantly better than the balcony-microphone feed for sound quality and naturalness; the stage mix did not differ significantly from no feed.", "The authors conclude that a loop did not seem crucial for orchestral music; participants remarked that spoken introductions were hard to follow without an assistive feed.", "The authors' manuscript reports that loop feeds were delayed to match the direct sound at the loop, that balcony microphones may have added about 40 ms of uncorrected delay, and that a Wi-Fi-to-phone-to-hearing-aid path tried in pilot work had about 350 ms latency.", "Gives uncorrected delay as another possible explanation for the lower ratings of the balcony feed: the distance from the stage to the balcony microphones, likely around 40 ms, was not accounted for (preprint p. 12).", "The verified OSF preprint (doi:10.31234/osf.io/ru49x, published 22 January 2024) dates the concert to 13 May 2023 in Procedure (p. 6). Its Future Directions section (p. 13) attributes most of the approximately 350 ms Wi-Fi-device-to-phone-to-hearing-aid delay to the phone-to-hearing-aid portion, without measuring that portion separately in a reported number. The pilot timing method, device models, date and sample size are not given.", "The verified preprint, Data Cleaning and Summary and Results (pp. 8-9), excludes one of the 20 telecoil participants from the repeated-measures analysis for missing stage-condition responses, leaving 19. After Bonferroni correction, no feed rated above the balcony feed for quality and naturalness; the stage versus no-feed difference was not significant.", "The verified preprint’s Data Cleaning and Summary (page 8) excludes one telecoil participant with no valid Stage responses from the repeated-measures analysis, leaving 19 of the 20 telecoil participants. Results (page 9) report that only the No Feed versus House differences remained significant after correction for multiple comparisons; the separate eight-person own-device group was a descriptive baseline.", "Discussion (page 12) offers greater captured reverberation in the balcony-microphone feed as one possible explanation for its lower ratings, alongside uncorrected microphone-path delay. Neither mechanism was isolated experimentally." ], "limitations": "One concert, one hall and one study hearing-aid model; ratings showed ceiling effects that limited the statistics; orchestral music only. Method and latency details come from the verified 23-page OSF preprint, read alongside the published abstract; the full journal article was not read. The preprint was downloaded and verified against the public OSF file hash on 13 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "device-compatibility", "listener-preference", "loop-limits", "wifi-latency", "room-acoustics", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "heinze-steinmetz-2025-auracast-security", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/heinze-steinmetz-2025-auracast-security/", "title": "Part I: Bluetooth Auracast from a Security Researcher’s Perspective", "authors": "Heinze D, Steinmetz F", "publisher": "ERNW, Insinuator.net", "date": "2025-01-27", "kind": "Technical research article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (ERNW security researchers; separate research funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://insinuator.net/2025/01/auracast-part1/", "summary": "Analyses Auracast discovery, authenticated encryption, shared-code trust and availability, distinguishing strong audio encryption from sender identity and resistance to disruption.", "findings": [ "The discovery discussion says that the advertisements and synchronization information are public for both open and encrypted streams; the authors identify an absence of authentication in that discovery chain.", "The authenticity discussion explains that encrypted audio and control packets use authenticated encryption, but anyone knowing the shared Broadcast_Code can create packets that pass those checks.", "The availability discussion distinguishes frequency hopping's protection against collisions from security against a deliberate adversary. Public timing and hopping information permits selective jamming even when the audio payload is encrypted.", "The authors describe a possible low-packet-count denial-of-service attack against encrypted broadcasts, leaving fuller attack details to later work. This article does not report a venue trial or product-wide success rate.", "Recommends strong random default codes and, where users can set them, random 16-character codes. The authors also propose changes to code derivation and hopping information; these are proposals rather than features established as present in products." ], "limitations": "Full written article read through the Wayback Machine because the original domain failed DNS resolution. Embedded videos were not watched. Protocol analysis and examples of early phone and earbud implementations; no representative device sample, venue incident count or measured jamming coverage. Some recommendations concern future specification changes.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "minnesota-2025-16c054", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/minnesota-2025-16c054/", "title": "2025 Minnesota Statutes, section 16C.054: Accommodation for hard-of-hearing in state-funded capital projects", "authors": "Minnesota Legislature", "publisher": "Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes", "date": "2025-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Regulation (state statute)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (State of Minnesota)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/16C.054", "summary": "The official statute requires loops and acoustic criteria in qualifying state-funded public gathering spaces, subject to a consultation-based exemption.", "findings": [ "Subdivision 1 defines a public gathering space as one constructed or renovated in the project, accommodating and intended for gatherings of at least 15 people, where audible communication is integral to a use of the space. Subdivision 2 applies to capital improvement projects constructing or renovating such spaces in buildings.", "Subdivision 2 bars approval of a contract or grant of state funds for a qualifying capital project unless a space with existing or planned permanent amplification receives audio-induction loops for hearing aids and cochlear implants. It also requires the school acoustical criteria of the American National Standards Institute for maximum background noise and reverberation times.", "Subdivision 3 allows an exemption for infeasibility, conflicts with law or project requirements, or costs outweighing benefits, after consultation with the state commission. Subdivision 4 requires exemption reporting within three months and biennial reports to legislative committees.", "The page identifies the text as the 2025 Minnesota Statutes and lists a 2017 enactment and a 2018 amendment in its history. The section names no loop performance standard or receiver count." ], "limitations": "The publication year is the statute edition, not the enactment date. The section page does not reproduce the original session law's effective-date and completed-schematic-design provisions; those are retained separately in the library's 2024 commission report. No project-specific exemption or installed performance was assessed.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "sinai-2025-assistive-devices", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sinai-2025-assistive-devices/", "title": "Assistive devices for patients who are hearing impaired", "authors": "Sinai Health Equity & Accessibility Committee", "publisher": "Sinai Health", "date": "2025-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Hospital operational guidance (policy and procedure III-l-15-16)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (Sinai Health hospital procedure, issued by its Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Committee and approved by Administration; no separate funding statement)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://sinaihealth.ca/media/21976/download", "summary": "A hospital procedure assigns responsibility for signing out, cleaning and returning assistive devices lent to patients, including bedside amplifiers.", "findings": [ "The procedure was effective in December 2006 and reviewed and revised in January 2025; devices are available to inpatient and ambulatory areas, with staff asked to identify patients who need them.", "Staff sign devices out from Interpreter Services; PocketTalkers are also available through nursing unit clerks on 17 North and South, Emergency and Intensive Care.", "The requesting unit is responsible for cleaning and returning devices. The policy describes wipeable skins or Virox wipes, referral to Sterilizing and Processing for additional cleaning, and Infection Control advice for special requests.", "Returned items are signed in. Devices remain hospital property and cannot be lent for discharge or transfer." ], "limitations": "A local operating procedure, not an audit of whether staff follow it or a test of cleaning effectiveness. Only its hospital loan process and bedside amplifier provision are used here; telephone and alerting devices are outside scope. The printed title in the header ends at HEARING; the complete description appears in the procedure text.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "auri-2025-commissioning-tools", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/auri-2025-commissioning-tools/", "title": "Auri user guide: RX1 commissioning tools (UP3B613-1)", "authors": "Listen Technologies and Ampetronic (Auri)", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "2025-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer installation guide", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies and Ampetronic)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/wp-content/uploads/UP3B613-01-Auri-User-Guide-RX1-Commissioning-Tool_A4_WEB.pdf", "summary": "Describes the two commissioning tools in the Auri RX1 receiver (firmware 1.4 or later), a transmitter survey and a signal-quality check, and how to interpret their results.", "findings": [ "Page 3 says TX Survey detects Auri transmitters and reports a strong, fair or weak mark, an RSSI value and a broadcast count without joining a stream. TX # counts transmitted broadcasts: the example gives two for one TX2N with two streams. With the venue empty, the reading \"should be better than 60dB\" (the guide's wording).", "The Signal Quality tool runs on a joined broadcast and shows RSSI, a quality bar, a status and an interference symbol for possible interference or significant packet-loss correction. Page 4 asks for 5 to 6 seconds for Signal Quality readings to settle and recommends headphone listening; the separate TX Survey instructions ask for a few seconds.", "Signal quality can be checked empty and in use; the guide asks installers to note significant differences between the two. A weak mark calls for moving or adding transmitters, although a receiver may still connect at reduced quality.", "After installation, it recommends recording RSSI at several locations and comparing them with the predicted coverage map.", "Poor quality despite high RSSI is treated as a possible sign of interference, for example from Wi-Fi or wireless DMX. The guide suggests switching other services off and on to find the source, and adjusting power levels or frequency bands with the venue.", "Page 4 places an empty-venue instruction beside Signal Quality, although its main text permits tests both empty and in use. The adjacent note says an empty venue provides optimal signal levels without obstructions." ], "limitations": "Applies only to Auri transmitters and the RX1 receiver. The guide gives no numerical measurement-accuracy tolerance or numerical thresholds for the strong, fair and weak marks, and the RSSI target is given as \"better than 60dB\" without a sign or reference level. Undated beyond its 2025 copyright.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "signal-target", "interference", "commissioning-tests", "venue-self-checks", "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2025-digi-wave-400-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2025-digi-wave-400-manual/", "title": "Digi-Wave 400 Series User Manual (MAN 241N)", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV", "date": "2025-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, which sells the Digi-Wave system described as well as FM, infrared, hearing loop, Wi-Fi and Auracast assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Dig-Wave-400-Manual-DLT-400-DW-T410-MAN-241N.pdf", "summary": "A maker's manual for a proprietary 2.4 GHz digital system used for tours, interpretation, intercom and hearing assistance, with its encryption, groups and range.", "findings": [ "Describes a digital spread-spectrum system that hops across 2402-2476 MHz at 19 dBm typical output, and says its frequency-hopping algorithm \"avoids interference and is a very secure method of communication\".", "Gives a range of up to 900 ft (274 m) depending on the environment, with a repeater mode that extends range by up to 50%.", "Has a Hearing Assistance mode with raised tone control; listeners use receivers with headphones, and the manual mentions neckloops for one transceiver model.", "Recommends no more than four groups at once within the same area to prevent interference, with up to 15 channels in use at once; in a venue with two theatres, each may have its own group.", "Offers 87-bit encryption by default and an AES-128 layer on top that requires a four-digit Encryption PIN; devices without the PIN cannot listen, which it suggests for private or high-security functions, and it advises against 0000 or other easily guessed PINs.", "Notes limits: the PIN cannot be used with its AA-battery receiver model, an older receiver model cannot receive encrypted signals, and the series is not backward compatible with its earliest generations.", "Gives an audio frequency response of 100-11,500 Hz in most modes and 100-7,200 Hz in intercom, interpretation and court modes." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's manual for its own product, without test data; the range and interference claims are the maker's. The system is designed mainly for tours, interpretation and two-way groups, with hearing assistance as one mode. Dated by its 2025 copyright; the file was created on 7 November 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands", "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "anovum-2025-eurotrak-uk", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/anovum-2025-eurotrak-uk/", "title": "EuroTrak UK 2025", "authors": "Anovum", "publisher": "European Hearing Instrument Manufacturers Association (EHIMA)", "date": "2025-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Paper (industry consumer survey results)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Trade body (commissioned by EHIMA and BIHIMA, the European and British-Irish hearing instrument manufacturers' associations; designed, fielded and analysed by the research firm Anovum with a panel company, and EHIMA approved the questionnaire)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ehima.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/EuroTrak_UK_2025.pdf", "summary": "The hearing aid manufacturers' 2025 UK consumer survey, including how many hearing aid owners know their aids have a telecoil and where they use it.", "findings": [ "Page 51 asks where owners use their telecoil and lists settings without distinguishing room loops, counter loops or receiver-neckloop paths. The school/university choice does not isolate venue-provided equipment from personal equipment or classroom use; it establishes a reported setting only. No recall interval is printed for this item.", "Page 13 reports self-declared hearing loss in 9.9% of adults aged 18 and over in the UK screening sample (n=15,118), rising from 5.3% at ages 45-54 to 9.8% at 55-64, 15.9% at 65-74 and 30.0% above age 74.", "Page 14 gives hearing aid adoption as 50.5% among people with self-declared loss (screening subgroup n=1,382), and 58.8% among those aged 65 and older with self-declared loss. These screening bases differ from the detailed questionnaire samples of 718 owners and 567 non-owners.", "Page 5 states that 5% of hearing aid owners report zero hours of use; ownership alone does not establish use at a venue.", "Page 51 labels the telecoil-frequency chart as 68 owners equipped with telecoils: never 10%, rarely 32%, occasionally 32%, often 23%, very often 3%. The locations chart labels its base as 68 owners who use telecoils, with overlapping answers; additional locations are office buildings 20%, conference rooms 17% and drive-through/ticket window/bank counter 7%.", "Page 51 labels the telecoil-satisfaction chart as 59 users: very dissatisfied 0%, dissatisfied 2%, somewhat dissatisfied 1%, neutral 8%, somewhat satisfied 34%, satisfied 39%, very satisfied 16%. The page does not reconcile the 68-person use-location base with this 59-person satisfaction base; telecoil use includes telephone and other purposes beyond venues.", "Methods (pp. 8-9) describes interlocked age/gender quotas, a soft regional quota, panel recruitment and weighting of the target samples to the representative screening sample. Weighted percentages need not equal raw subgroup counts divided by the total sample.", "11% of UK hearing aid owners (n=718) said their hearing aids have a telecoil, 26% said they do not and 63% did not know.", "Among owners with a telecoil (n=68), the places they use it most were theatres or auditoriums (38%), schools or universities (31%), churches (31%), train stations (27%) and airports (25%); 19% use it with the phone.", "31% of hearing aid owners use a hearing aid app, and 76% of them are satisfied with it.", "69% of owners received a free NHS hearing aid, and the median age of hearing aids at replacement was four years.", "Page 9 describes screening 15,118 people from large panellist pools using interlocked age/gender quotas and a soft regional quota, based on census data. The detailed samples of 718 owners and 567 non-owners were then balanced by weighting to the screening interviews; the page does not specify online recruitment or weighting of the screening sample itself." ], "limitations": "Industry-commissioned, and features are self-reported: with 63% unsure, the figure shows what owners know rather than what their aids have. The report describes panel recruitment and quotas but does not establish how well the panel covers people outside those pools. The report is a slide deck with no publication date beyond 2025 and does not ask about Auracast or which venue systems people meet.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "places-of-worship", "theatres-and-cinemas", "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "sterkens-whyman-2025", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sterkens-whyman-2025/", "title": "Helping People Hear Anywhere with Telecoils and Auracast", "authors": "Sterkens J, Whyman W", "publisher": "Canadian Audiologist 12(1)", "date": "2025-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Advocacy article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (both authors work with the Center for Hearing Access: Wynne Whyman as its director of communication and advocacy, Juliëtte Sterkens as its hearing access advocate; Sterkens left practice in 2012 to work as HLAA's national hearing loop advocate, with outreach funded by the David & Carol Myers Foundation)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://canadianaudiologist.ca/helping-people-hear-anywhere-with-telecoils-and-auracast/", "summary": "Two loop advocates advise audiologists to keep supporting hearing loops and telecoils, and to fit devices with both telecoils and Auracast, while Auracast assistive listening matures.", "findings": [ "Advise audiologists to keep supporting hearing loop, FM/RF and infrared installations and to add Auracast assistive listening only once patients' own devices connect to it reliably, which they say was not yet the case in January 2025.", "Estimate that 99.9% of users then lacked Auracast-capable hearing instruments, so early Auracast systems would work like FM or infrared, with loaned receivers and headphones or neckloops; they note hearing instruments are typically kept 4 to 7 years.", "State that there is plenty of evidence that patients prefer hearing loops, because loops connect directly to their own hearing aids, while finding a receiver with a neckloop is a hassle and makes the hearing loss visible.", "Expect a phone or other assistant to be needed to select an assistive listening stream. Separately, the latency paragraph anticipates 30-40 ms or more for Auracast transmission, added to other system delays; it does not attribute this audio delay to the assistant. The following paragraph anticipates variation between transmitters in automatic gain control, which the authors say the loop standard requires.", "Call for hearing instruments with both built-in telecoils and Auracast for the next decade, noting consumer declarations on this since 2009, and expect FM/RF, infrared, loops and Auracast to coexist.", "Says locating an Auracast receiver with a neckloop is a hassle and \"outs\" the disability many patients try to hide." ], "limitations": "An opinion piece by loop advocates, with no new data; the 99.9% figure is the authors' estimate. Written in January 2025 (the page's metadata gives 15 January 2025), before most Auracast hearing devices and transmitters were available. The statement that IEC 60118-4 requires automatic gain control has not been checked here against the paywalled standard. The authors' affiliations are from the Center for Hearing Access leadership page and a 2019 Hearing Review interview, not the article itself.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "cochlear-2025-kanso-3-specs", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cochlear-2025-kanso-3-specs/", "title": "Kanso 3 Sound Processor (CP1170): technical specifications", "authors": "Cochlear", "publisher": "Cochlear (specification sheet FUN5422 ISS1, Cochlear Americas)", "date": "2025-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer specification sheet", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Cochlear)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://assets.cochlear.com/api/public/content/FUN5422-Kanso-3-Tech-Specs-Sheet.pdf", "summary": "Cochlear's two-page specification sheet for its off-the-ear Kanso 3 cochlear implant sound processor, including its Bluetooth, LE Audio and FM connections.", "findings": [ "Lists the processor as \"Ready for Bluetooth LE Audio – firmware updates required\". A footnote says a firmware update will be needed to use certain features as LE Audio devices become available, and that Auracast capability \"is subject to third party adoption of the Auracast protocol\".", "Lists direct streaming from compatible Apple and Android devices, streaming from other Bluetooth devices through the Cochlear Wireless Phone Clip, and compatibility with Cochlear True Wireless accessories and the CR310 remote control.", "Gives FM access only \"Via the Cochlear Wireless Mini Microphone 2+ with a three-pin Euro receiver\".", "Its lists of key features and connectivity do not mention a telecoil." ], "limitations": "A maker's specification sheet for its own product, dated by its print code (January 2025, copyright 2025). It states an intended LE Audio update without a date and reports no test. It does not say in so many words whether the processor has a telecoil; the absence is only from its feature lists.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2024-wavecast-app", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2024-wavecast-app/", "title": "WaveCAST Audio Receiver (App Store listing, version 2.11.0)", "authors": "Williams Sound, LLC (Williams AV)", "publisher": "Apple App Store (seller: Williams Sound, LLC)", "date": "2024-12-18", "kind": "Manufacturer app store listing", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, maker of the WaveCAST Wi-Fi system, which also sells FM, infrared, hearing loop and Auracast products; the listing and its privacy label are written by the developer)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://apps.apple.com/us/app/wavecast-audio-receiver/id1458383632", "summary": "Williams AV's App Store listing for the WaveCAST app, through which listeners hear a WaveCAST venue's audio over Wi-Fi on their own iPhone or iPad.", "findings": [ "Describes connecting to a WaveCAST-enabled Wi-Fi network at a venue and choosing a channel and volume in the app, for assistive listening at events, conferences and public spaces.", "Requires iOS 15.0 or later. Its privacy label, written by the developer and not verified by Apple, states \"Data Not Collected\".", "The version history records an update in May 2024 that let audio resume after interruptions from other apps, such as Siri, and fixed an issue where some users could not connect to the WaveCAST Wi-Fi network; updates from November 2024 claim reduced audio latency with Bluetooth devices, and version 2.11.0 fixed compatibility issues with certain WaveCAST servers and certain Bluetooth playback devices.", "A July 2022 update limited the app's operating-system compatibility to iOS 14 and 15 at that time, and earlier updates fixed problems that followed iOS 13 and iOS 14." ], "limitations": "A developer's self-written listing, read on 9 October 2026; listings and privacy labels change with each release. The date is the release of version 2.11.0, the newest in the version history. The latency claims give no figures. The maker's network guide, dated 2024, still lists iOS 9.1 or newer and Android 6.0 or newer as the supported phones. User reviews on the listing were not used.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "cha-2024-what-is-needed", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-2024-what-is-needed/", "title": "What is needed for Auracast streamed assistive listening systems to be available and usable", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access (reviewed by Juliette Sterkens, AuD)", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access, The John G. Shedd Institute", "date": "2024-12-15", "kind": "Advocacy handout", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts; it states that it accepts no donations from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/What-is-needed-for-Auracast-streamed-ALS-to-be-available-and-usable.pdf", "summary": "A two-page handout listing the conditions the Center for Hearing Access sees as needed before Auracast assistive listening is available and usable, with expectations for the transition.", "findings": [ "Treats end-to-end latency as the sum of every link from microphone, sound system and transmitter to receiver or phone and hearing instrument, and gives a rule of thumb, marked as under review, of less than about 30 to 40 ms.", "States that Auracast assistive listening is not \"plug and play\" and needs skilled installers to connect it to existing microphones and audio-visual systems.", "Lists open needs: connection to PA and paging systems, private one-to-one use at service desks and counters, a dedicated assistive-listening stream that hearing instruments can join with minimal interaction, and direct connection without an intermediary device.", "Expects early systems to be used like FM or infrared, with loaned receivers and headphones or neckloops, because it estimates that 99% of users lack Auracast-capable hearing instruments, which people typically keep for 5 to 7 years or more.", "Notes that IEC 60118-17 is scheduled for December 2027 and that until it is published it cannot be known whether products will meet it." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance without new measurements. The 99% figure is the publisher's estimate with no stated source. Last revised 15 December 2024.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "finding-and-joining", "service-counters", "listener-reach", "wifi-latency", "lifetime-costs", "healthcare-settings", "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "australia-2024-premises-standards", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/australia-2024-premises-standards/", "title": "Disability (Access to Premises — Buildings) Standards 2010, Compilation No. 3 (23 November 2024)", "authors": "Australian Government", "publisher": "Federal Register of Legislation; compilation prepared by the Department of Industry, Science and Resources", "date": "2024-11-23", "kind": "Regulation (federal disability standards)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (Australian Government)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2010L00668/2024-11-23/2024-11-23/text/original/pdf", "summary": "Australia's federal Premises Standards contain hearing-augmentation, coverage, receiver and sign provisions separately from the National Construction Code.", "findings": [ "Section 2.1 covers specified new buildings, new and affected parts of existing buildings, and existing public transport buildings subject to target dates. New-building and new-part definitions use approval applications on or after 1 May 2011, with corresponding rules for Crown work without an application. The affected part includes the principal pedestrian entrance and the route to the new part.", "Section 3.1 imposes duties on building developers, managers and the other persons identified in section 2.2. Section 3.2 identifies deemed-to-satisfy provisions and preserves other ways to satisfy the applicable performance requirements, including access at least equal to that provided by those provisions. Section 4.1 provides an unjustifiable-hardship exception, while requiring access to the maximum extent that does not involve such hardship.", "Access Code D3.7(1) requires hearing augmentation where inbuilt amplification, other than emergency-warning-only amplification, is installed in a Class 9b room; an auditorium, conference room, meeting room or room for judicatory purposes; or a ticket office, teller's booth, reception area or similar location where the public is screened from the service provider.", "D3.7(2) requires a loop to cover at least 80% of the floor area served by the amplification system. A system requiring receivers or similar devices must reach at least 95% of that area.", "For receiver systems D3.7(2)(b) specifies at least two receivers or one per 25 persons up to 500, whichever is greater; 20 plus one per 33 persons over 500 up to 1,000; 35 plus one per 50 over 1,000 up to 2,000; and 55 plus one per 100 over 2,000. Each increment includes any part thereof. D3.7(3) refers to BCA D1.13 for calculating persons accommodated. No hearing-aid-compatible share is specified here.", "In a building required to be accessible, D3.6(a)-(b) requires braille and tactile identification of spaces with hearing augmentation and an in-room sign with the international symbol for deafness giving the system type, coverage area and receiver collection location if receivers are used.", "The hearing provisions D3.6-D3.7 name induction loops and systems requiring receivers; they do not name Auracast or Bluetooth." ], "limitations": "The date is the compilation date; the authorised copy was registered on 20 December 2024. Read the scope, requirements and exceptions in Parts 2-4 and Access Code D3.6-D3.7. The table's hearing provisions do not reproduce every exception, building classification or transport target date. No conclusion is drawn about a particular building or an alternative solution.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "williams-av-2024-ir-t3-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2024-ir-t3-manual/", "title": "IR T3 Infrared Transmitter user manual (MAN 295)", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV", "date": "2024-11-06", "kind": "Manufacturer user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, maker of the SoundPlus IR T3 transmitter described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/MAN-295-IRT3-User-Manual.pdf", "summary": "The maker's manual for its two-channel IR T3 infrared transmitter, with coverage by receiver type and its notes on sunlight, plasma screens and what blocks the signal.", "findings": [ "Describes a combined modulator and emitter that transmits two channels at once, on 2.3 and 2.8 MHz or on 3.3 and 3.8 MHz, frequencies it says \"minimize high-efficiency lighting interference\"; no FCC licence or radio approval is needed.", "Gives single-channel coverage of up to 32,000 sq ft (2,972 m²) with its RX22-4 handheld receiver and 19,000 sq ft (1,765 m²) with its RX20 stethoset (under-chin) receiver.", "Says the coverage pattern can be affected by direct or indirect sunlight, reflections from walls and room construction, and that radiation does not drop to zero outside the pattern; most objects block infrared, so the transmitter \"cannot be concealed behind walls, glass, curtains, etc.\"", "Warns that a plasma monitor or television can degrade the audio quality, and that the transmitter should be placed as far from one as possible.", "Calls the transmitter ideal for music, theatre and audio description." ], "limitations": "The maker's figures for its own products, without independent measurement. It does not discuss LED lighting or outdoor use. Date from the PDF's creation date; the manual carries a 2024 copyright.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "infrared-limits", "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "hunn-2024-le-audio-book", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hunn-2024-le-audio-book/", "title": "Introducing Bluetooth LE Audio, 2nd edition (including Auracast)", "authors": "Nick Hunn", "publisher": "Nick Hunn; free digital edition distributed by the Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2024-11-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Technical book", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (the author's own book; free edition distributed by the Bluetooth SIG; the 2024 Broadcast Audio URI specification lists the author under GN Hearing, a hearing-aid maker)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Introduction-to-LE-Audio-2.0.pdf", "summary": "A guide to the LE Audio specifications by a former chair of the SIG's Hearing Aid Working Group, with chapters on broadcast, Presentation Delay and Auracast.", "findings": [ "Section 2.2.8 expands LC3 as Low Complexity Communications Codec and describes it as the mandatory Bluetooth LE Audio codec. Section 3.3 describes encoding and decoding, and groups of streams with related timing, such as separate stereo channels.", "Section 4.4 describes broadcast isochronous streams (BIS) as one-way streams without a connection or receiver acknowledgements; receivers need the appropriate Broadcast_Code when a stream is encrypted. Section 4.4.1 (printed pp. 110–111) describes a Broadcast Isochronous Group (BIG) as one or more BISes and explains the timed intervals, anchor points and spacing of their transmissions.", "Chapter 12 describes Auracast as the Bluetooth SIG's brand for interoperable broadcast audio. Its introduction explains the Broadcast Assistant as a proxy user interface for the receiving device, potentially a phone application or another device, used to choose broadcasts.", "Discussing a TV heard through both its speakers and a hearing aid, states that a gap of much more than 30 to 40 ms between the stream and the room sound begins to be heard as echo, and that 30 to 40 ms is the sound travel time over about 10 m (section 2.1.1.2). No study is cited for the threshold.", "Presentation Delay can be set per transmitter in a large auditorium or stadium to offset the distance between each audience area and the sound source, as venues already do with loudspeaker delays (section 3.12).", "For broadcasts, values above 40 ms should generally be avoided because they may cause echo where room sound is present; the book calls alignment in large venues a fairly specialised use. The specifications do not say what a receiver should do with a Presentation Delay outside the range it supports.", "Reports that demonstrations of broadcast transmitters at 4 mW reached usable ranges of more than 50 m, without giving conditions (section 4.4).", "A phone acting as assistant may detect transmitters that are out of range of the user's earbuds, because its receiver is usually more sensitive (section 8.8.2)." ], "limitations": "The author's explanations, not a specification. The Broadcast Audio URI specification (2024) lists the author under GN Hearing A/S.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "large-venues" ] }, { "id": "gasteiger-2024-bacon", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/gasteiger-2024-bacon/", "title": "BACON: improving broadcast audio authentication", "authors": "Gasteiger T, Perazzo P, Schuß M, Boano CA, Basic F, Dini G, Römer K", "publisher": "IEEE MILCOM 2024 (Graz University of Technology; University of Pisa)", "date": "2024-10-28", "kind": "Peer-reviewed conference paper", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Graz University of Technology; University of Pisa); funding not stated in the paper", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1109/MILCOM61039.2024.10774045", "summary": "Proposes a way to authenticate Bluetooth LE broadcast audio so that receivers can tell a genuine broadcast from an impostor.", "findings": [ "Section II (BIS security) and section III explain that encrypted broadcast authentication uses a key derived from the shared Broadcast_Code. An attacker who knows that code can defeat this protection, impersonate broadcasts or disrupt reception; the paper also distinguishes unencrypted broadcasts.", "Presents BACON, a mechanism designed to work within the Bluetooth core specification, which authenticates both the audio streams and the control information sent to all receivers in range.", "Uses lightweight symmetric cryptography so that it fits on resource-constrained devices.", "Sections VI and VII describe a proof of concept on two development boards transmitting dummy audio; the effect on practical audio applications remains future work.", "Section VI (PDF pages 6–7, Figures 7–8) reports tests of ten runs of 1,000 BIG events, using a Wi-Fi access point to create interference. Authentication added processing time and receiver power consumption. The additional authentication packets reduced packet reception compared with the stream without BACON; increasing retransmissions narrowed that reception gap but also increased power use. These are development-board measurements, not hearing-device battery-life tests.", "The threat model in section III concerns adversaries who know the shared code; it does not establish a measured rate of attacks in operating venues." ], "limitations": "Read from the archived full author-hosted conference paper (https://www.carloalbertoboano.com/documents/gasteiger24bacon.pdf), which contains no funding statement. A proposed mechanism, not part of the Bluetooth specification; the proof of concept uses dummy audio, with no field data on attacks against real venues.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "interference", "privacy", "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "efhoh-2024-auracast-telecoils", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/efhoh-2024-auracast-telecoils/", "title": "Position statement on Auracast and telecoils", "authors": "European Federation of Hard of Hearing People (EFHOH)", "publisher": "EFHOH", "date": "2024-10-18", "kind": "Position statement", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (European federation; EFHOH states that its 2024-2026 publications are co-funded by the EU CERV programme)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://efhoh.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/EFHOH-position-statement-on-concerns-about-withdrawal-from-telecoils-FINAL97.pdf", "summary": "EFHOH's call for a balanced approach in which hearing aids and cochlear implants keep telecoils while Auracast is introduced.", "findings": [ "Calls on hearing aid and cochlear implant makers to keep telecoils for at least the next decade, and holds that telecoil access to hearing loops is needed in Europe for at least the next 10 to 15 years.", "Reports concern at suggestions that hearing loops and telecoils are no longer needed because Auracast will replace them.", "Reports that experts at a September 2024 EFHOH webinar, held with the hearing loop manufacturers' association IHLMA, said European radio and medical-device rules raise manufacturing costs and slow adoption, and raised concerns about acceptance by older users and about venues lacking the infrastructure.", "Asks audiologists to inform clients about both telecoil and Bluetooth features and to demonstrate both." ], "limitations": "A policy position without data. The webinar experts' views are reported second-hand, and the webinar was held with a loop manufacturers' trade body.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "future-proofing", "listener-reach", "telecoil-fitting", "loop-and-auracast", "signage-and-awareness", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-pbp-test-suite", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-pbp-test-suite/", "title": "Public Broadcast Profile (PBP) Test Suite, revision PBP.TS.p3", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Audio, Telephony, and Automotive Working Group", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2024-10-08", "kind": "Test specification", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://files.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2024/10/PBP.TS_.p3-1.pdf", "summary": "A published PBP test suite checks broadcast announcements, stream configurations and reception behavior; its test strategy explicitly allows simulated stream contents without encoded audio.", "findings": [ "Section 3.2 describes tests of PBP functionality in Bluetooth hosts, matched to the implementation’s declared features, to support interoperability between hosts on different devices.", "The test setup uses a peer test device over the air and an upper tester to stimulate or inspect the implementation. Stream contents can be simulated and need not contain encoded audio (page 8).", "Sections 4.2 and 4.3 test programme metadata, Standard Quality and High Quality broadcast configurations, encryption indicators, the broadcast name and whether the associated broadcast group has the stated configuration.", "Section 4.4 tests whether sinks receive announcements and names and synchronize to streams; assistant tests check reception of announcements and names. Invalid-behavior tests check handling of reserved bits.", "Section 5 maps test cases to the supported features and roles in the implementation’s feature statement. This is not a requirement that every device implement every PBP role.", "The listed PBP pass criteria do not measure a venue’s occupied coverage, microphone-to-ear latency or delivered sound level. This suite is only one part of Bluetooth qualification; it does not describe every underlying radio, codec or profile test." ], "limitations": "Revision p3, dated 8 October 2024 and published for TCRL.2024-2-addition, is a dated example of test scope. The current specification landing page’s download endpoint was blocked and its Wayback lookup had no usable copy; this record does not establish which suite revision a later product used. The full 20-page PDF was extracted; pages 7–19 were read and page 8 visually checked.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "mhclg-2024-approved-document-m", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/mhclg-2024-approved-document-m/", "title": "Approved Document M, Volume 2: buildings other than dwellings (2015 edition incorporating 2020 and 2024 amendments)", "authors": "UK Government", "publisher": "Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (GOV.UK)", "date": "2024-09-30", "kind": "Building regulations guidance", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (UK Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66f6c5eec71e42688b65ee11/ADM__V2_with_2024_amendments.pdf", "summary": "England's official guidance on meeting the access requirements of the Building Regulations in buildings other than homes, including hearing enhancement systems.", "findings": [ "The Use of guidance section (printed page 5) explains that Approved Documents give practical guidance on Building Regulations requirements and that other ways of meeting the requirements are possible.", "Paragraph 0.1 (printed page 11) says Requirements M1, M2 and M3 apply to new non-domestic buildings, extensions, material alterations and specified material changes of use. It separately notes Equality Act duties to consider barriers created by physical features.", "Paragraph 4.36 says aids to communication satisfy Requirement M1 if provision for a hearing enhancement system is installed in rooms and spaces for meetings, lectures, classes, performances, spectator sport or films, and at service or reception counters in noisy areas or behind glazed screens.", "Paragraph 4.36(b), on printed page 46, lists hearing enhancement in rooms and spaces designed for meetings, lectures, classes, performances, spectator sport or films, and at service or reception counters in noisy areas or behind glazed screens, as one of the provisions for satisfying Requirement M1. Paragraph 4.36 also lists other communication provisions; hearing enhancement alone is not presented as sufficient.", "Paragraph 4.35 names induction loop, infrared and radio as the three systems commonly used, says larger spaces need a permanent system while a portable loop is acceptable in small meeting rooms, warns that loops in adjacent spaces may overlap, and points to BS 8300 for detailed guidance.", "Paragraph 3.6 expects any reception point to have a hearing enhancement system, giving an induction loop as the example.", "Paragraph 4.36(c) asks for the standard symbol to show where an induction loop or infrared system is present; it names no symbol for other systems and does not mention Bluetooth or Auracast.", "The opening 2015 change summary states that Volume 2 takes effect in England on 1 October 2015; the earlier edition continues to apply to work started, or covered by a building notice, full plans application or initial notice submitted, before that date. The stated changes split the document into dwelling and non-dwelling volumes.", "The opening 2020 amendment summary concerns Changing Places toilets and building-capacity calculations. The 2024 summary concerns references and consequential changes for toilet accommodation. Neither summary identifies a new hearing-system provision; the consolidated text contains the hearing guidance in 3.6(f), 4.35 and 4.36(b)-(c)." ], "limitations": "Guidance for England only; Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own. Sets no receiver numbers, coverage figures or performance limits. The 2015 text predates Auracast.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "service-counters", "loop-verification", "infrared-limits", "signage-and-awareness", "courts-and-chambers", "theatres-and-cinemas", "healthcare-settings", "stadiums-and-arenas", "hotels-and-conference-centres", "lecture-halls", "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "apple-2024-wifi-roaming", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/apple-2024-wifi-roaming/", "title": "Wi-Fi roaming support in Apple devices (Apple Platform Deployment)", "authors": "Apple", "publisher": "Apple Support", "date": "2024-09-25", "kind": "Manufacturer support page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Apple, maker of the iPhone and iPad; general Wi-Fi deployment guidance, not written about assistive listening)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/wi-fi-roaming-support-dep98f116c0f/web", "summary": "Apple's guidance for network designers on when and how iPhones, iPads and Macs move from one Wi-Fi access point to another.", "findings": [ "Explains that the device, not the network, decides when to roam, mainly from the signal strength of the current and neighbouring access points.", "iPhones and iPads keep their current access point until its signal falls to about -70 dBm, then look for another on the same network, and move only to one that is at least 8 dB stronger when the device is transmitting data, or 12 dB stronger when idle. In a network designed with -67 dBm cell overlap, it notes, they stay on the weaker access point longer than expected.", "Says that with 802.1X authentication a roam can take several seconds, during which data cannot pass and users may see interrupted service, and that 802.11k, 802.11r, 802.11v and key caching, which current iPhones support, help devices find candidates and roam quickly.", "Advises keeping device behaviour in mind when designing cells and their overlap, and measuring overlap with the devices that will actually use the network, because antennas vary between models." ], "limitations": "General guidance for enterprise networks, not about audio streaming or venues; it does not say how long a roam interrupts an audio stream on a network without 802.1X, and covers Apple devices only. The date is the published date shown on the page.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "nidcd-hearing-statistics", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nidcd-hearing-statistics/", "title": "Quick Statistics About Hearing, Balance, & Dizziness", "authors": "National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders", "publisher": "National Institutes of Health, NIDCD", "date": "2024-09-20", "kind": "Informational page (government statistics summary)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (US National Institutes of Health; statistics compiled by NIDCD from federal surveys and published research)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/quick-statistics-hearing", "summary": "A US statistics summary separating self-reported difficulty, measured hearing loss, hearing aid use and cumulative implant-device registrations.", "findings": [ "Reports that approximately 15% of US adults aged 18 and over report some trouble hearing, citing the 2012 National Health Interview Survey.", "NIDCD calculations from 2015-2020 NHANES give disabling hearing loss in about 5% of adults aged 45-54, 10% aged 55-64, 22% aged 65-74 and 55% aged 75 and older. Its footnote defines this as 35 dB or more in the better ear.", "Among people who could benefit from hearing aids, approximately 16% of adults aged 20-69 and 30% aged 70 and older have ever used them. The footnote describes an NHIS ever-use numerator and a denominator estimated from periodic NHANES hearing examinations for Healthy People tracking.", "The US cochlear implant totals refer to devices reported voluntarily by manufacturers to the FDA as of December 2019; they are not a count of distinct current listeners.", "The page states a last-updated date of 20 September 2024; the statistics it assembles refer to different underlying years." ], "limitations": "The summary supplies no sample sizes for its age-specific calculations or hearing aid use estimates and no single observation year for the latter. Ever having used a hearing aid does not establish current ownership, use at an event or ability to connect to a venue system. No venue-demand measurement.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "fda-2024-hearing-aid-software", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/fda-2024-hearing-aid-software/", "title": "FDA Authorizes First Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Software", "authors": "US Food and Drug Administration", "publisher": "US Food and Drug Administration", "date": "2024-09-12", "kind": "Regulatory announcement", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (FDA account of Apple's authorization; study funding is not stated in this announcement)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-authorizes-first-over-counter-hearing-aid-software", "summary": "FDA authorization of Apple's Hearing Aid Feature for compatible AirPods Pro, for adults with perceived mild to moderate hearing loss.", "findings": [ "The feature turns compatible AirPods Pro into an over-the-counter hearing aid for people aged 18 or older, with self-fitting through an iOS device.", "FDA reports a 118-person study at multiple US sites: self-fitting and professional fitting of the same device gave similar perceived benefit and comparable ear-canal amplification and speech-in-noise results." ], "limitations": "Regulatory summary, not the full clinical report. Funding and detailed results are absent. It compares fittings of the same device, not AirPods against venue receivers, and establishes no venue-broadcast compatibility.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2024-bau", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2024-bau/", "title": "Broadcast Audio URI, version 1.0", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Hearing Aid Working Group", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2024-09-10", "kind": "Specification", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/Files/Specification/HTML/BAU_v1.0/out/en/index-en.html", "summary": "Defines the text carried in Auracast QR codes and NFC tags that tells a phone or other assistant which broadcast, and which stream in it, to join.", "findings": [ "The text starts with \"BLUETOOTH:UUID:184F;\" followed by labelled fields. The broadcast name is mandatory, and the Broadcast Code must be included when the streams are encrypted, so the code itself carries the decryption key.", "Printed codes should rely on values that do not change: the Broadcast_ID is normally fixed for the life of the device, while random device addresses usually change about every 15 minutes and belong only in codes that can be regenerated.", "A code can select one stream within a broadcast, such as one language, or leave the choice to the listener's assistant app, so codes with different content can lead to different choices on screen.", "A static code does not show that the transmitter is switched on or within range; assistants that can scan should check that the broadcast is present and tell the user when it is not.", "The Version History records Board adoption of version 1.0 on 10 September 2024. The abstract describes out-of-band delivery of broadcast-selection information to a Broadcast Assistant or GATT Client, including through QR codes.", "Section 3.6.1 describes display clutter from multiple stream choices and metadata that directs an assistant to a particular BIG or subgroup. Sections 5.3-5.4 leave confirmation and alternative-option displays to implementations; a URI can identify one language or omit it so the assistant uses a preferred language or offers discovered choices." ], "limitations": "Defines a data format, not how venues should place or check codes. Support in phones and hearing-aid apps varies.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "commissioning-tests", "finding-and-joining", "privacy", "signage-and-awareness", "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "uefa-2024-accessibility-guidelines", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/uefa-2024-accessibility-guidelines/", "title": "UEFA Accessibility Guidelines (2024): stadium provisions for hard of hearing and deaf spectators", "authors": "UEFA, AccessibAll", "publisher": "UEFA", "date": "2024-09-05", "kind": "Sports accessibility guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (UEFA football governing body; developed with the support of AccessibAll)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://editorial.uefa.com/resources/0291-1bc63c80c17d-3b06fdde0dbe-1000/uefa_accessibility_guidelines.pdf", "summary": "UEFA guidance on stadium hearing assistance, including crowd noise, loops, FM, infrared and receiver management.", "findings": [ "Page 111 identifies crowd background noise and long distances from the audio source to the audience in bowls, explicitly giving the announcer's microphone as its example of the source; it also lists ticket offices, information counters and concessions as places where assistive listening can help.", "Pages 111-112 favour permanent loops in stadium bowls and at customer service points, while identifying FM as another commonly used bowl system. The guidance warns against amplifying surrounding noise.", "Pages 111-113 warn that direct sunlight limits infrared in stadium bowls; FM can cover large areas but obstructions can create dead spots.", "Pages 113-114 require venues choosing receiver-based systems to supply receivers, test and clean them, check batteries, and organise distribution and collection. Page 114 assigns distribution and collection to the owner, operator or event organiser unless otherwise decided. Collection points need signs, advance information for fans and stewards who know their locations." ], "limitations": "Guidance, not a national building rule or comparative field study. No coverage measurements, listener sample or cost data. Its broad statements about telecoil prevalence, FM licensing and loop users needing no receivers should not be generalised to every device, jurisdiction or listener. Relevant pages 110-114 read in the original UEFA PDF hosted by the Croatian Football Federation because the UEFA download was blocked. Publication date confirmed by UEFA's launch article.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "baert-2024-pimrc", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/baert-2024-pimrc/", "title": "Experimental validation of a Bluetooth-based speech audio broadcasting model", "authors": "Baert M, Pittevils J, Moons B, Hoebeke J", "publisher": "IEEE PIMRC 2024 (imec-IDLab, Ghent University; Cochlear Technology Centre)", "date": "2024-09-02", "kind": "Peer-reviewed conference paper (laboratory testbed and simulation)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Ghent University and imec; imec.icon BLE2AV project financed by imec and Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship; one co-author from Cochlear Technology Centre)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1109/PIMRC59610.2024.10817355", "summary": "Measured audio-frame loss and predicted speech quality of a Bluetooth LE broadcast on a cabled hardware testbed with added attenuation and Bluetooth interference, and extended the team's earlier simulation model to many interfering devices.", "findings": [ "Speech was broadcast with LC3 at 16 kHz, 10 ms frames and 32 kbps, settings every broadcast receiver must support, between two nRF5340 boards joined by shielded cable.", "Without repeated transmissions, mean frame loss rose from about 6% to about 22% as added attenuation went from 17.5 to 18.5 dB; with four transmissions per frame, loss stayed at or below 0.4%.", "With one busy Bluetooth LE connection nearby, frame loss without repetition was about 2% to 13%, higher when fewer radio channels were in use; with one repetition it fell to 0% on the hardware.", "In simulation, one repetition kept loss acceptable with up to 5 busy connections or 15 keyboards plus 15 mice; 10 busy connections or 20 keyboards plus 20 mice needed two repetitions.", "The authors use about 2% frame loss as a general upper limit before concealment artefacts become clearly audible, but one male-voice recording had almost no low-quality scores at about 5% loss.", "Section IV (Testbed Evaluation), in the paragraphs introducing external Bluetooth interference, uses four Bluetooth channel maps, from no blacklisting to excluding channels overlapping Wi-Fi channels 1, 6 and 11. The experiment adds one Bluetooth LE connection as interference; it does not transmit Wi-Fi traffic. These maps model channel exclusion, not the load of an active venue Wi-Fi network.", "The title page lists Ghent University/imec and Cochlear Technology Centre affiliations. Its first-page footnote states that this paper results from the imec.icon BLE2AV project, financed by imec and Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship.", "Table III reports nonzero mean frame loss even with two retransmissions: 0.55% for 10 busy connections and 0.13% for 20 keyboards plus 20 mice.", "Section IV uses a 2% frame-loss threshold from earlier analysis of 20 speech recordings as a general boundary for almost no PESQ scores below 2.0 (Zone C). In the two-recording testbed study, one recording had almost no Zone C scores at 4.97% mean frame loss; the authors stress that the threshold is only a general guide.", "Section IV evaluates two speech recordings with PESQ rather than listeners. Table I reports mean hardware frame loss of 5.68% and 22.11% at 17.5 and 18.5 dB added attenuation with one transmission, versus 0.00% and 0.40% with four transmissions; these are means, not maxima over individual runs." ], "limitations": "Cabled and shielded testbed, not over the air; one hardware platform; quality judged by an instrumental measure (PESQ), not listeners; multi-device results are simulated; no Wi-Fi traffic was transmitted.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "signal-target", "interference" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-core60-broadcast-security", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-core60-broadcast-security/", "title": "Bluetooth Core Specification 6.0: broadcast security in the Generic Access Profile and Low Energy Link Layer", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2024-08-27", "kind": "Specification", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/Files/Specification/HTML/Core-60/out/en/host/generic-access-profile.html", "summary": "Defines the three broadcast security levels, distinguishes authenticated delivery of a broadcast code, and specifies encrypted packet integrity checks and loss of synchronization after a failed check.", "findings": [ "Volume 3 Part C section 10.2.5 defines LE Security Mode 3 Level 1 as no authentication or encryption, Level 2 as use of an unauthenticated Broadcast_Code and Level 3 as use of an authenticated Broadcast_Code. Level 3 requires that the code be received using an authenticated method.", "Volume 3 Part C sections 3.2.6 and 10.9 describe the Broadcast_Code as the information used to encrypt a broadcast group and decrypt its streams. Its user-interface representation is 4 to 16 UTF-8 octets, with 16 recommended for higher security.", "Volume 6 Part E section 1 specifies AES-128 CCM encryption and authentication. With encryption enabled, non-empty data and isochronous payloads have a message integrity check and must be decrypted and authenticated before processing. Section 2 includes BIS data and BIG control packets.", "Volume 6 Part E section 1 says a message integrity check failure in a broadcast isochronous packet causes loss of synchronization: the Link Layer stops receiving further packets on that BIS and notifies the Host. This rejection rule does not promise uninterrupted listening." ], "limitations": "Read the public HTML for Volume 3 Part C, relevant sections of Volume 6 Part E and the version history. The companion Link Layer page is https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/Files/Specification/HTML/Core-60/out/en/low-energy-controller/low-energy-link-layer-security.html. This is the dated 6.0 edition, not a claim to cover all later revisions or actual products. The document specifies mechanisms, without venue attack tests or recovery-time measurements.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "listen-2024-listen-everywhere-network-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2024-listen-everywhere-network-guide/", "title": "Listen Everywhere Network Configuration Guide (ListenTech-Note LTN0025)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2024-08-15", "kind": "Manufacturer network guide", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the Listen Everywhere Wi-Fi system described and of its successor, ListenWIFI)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/LTN0025-Listen-Everywhere-Network-Configuration-2024-08-15-V4.pdf", "summary": "Listen Technologies' six-page note for IT staff on setting up a venue network so that its Listen Everywhere servers can stream audio over Wi-Fi to an app on listeners' phones.", "findings": [ "Describes two phases: the app first finds the audio server on the network, by multicast DNS or through a DNS record that IT staff create, and the server then streams the audio to the app. It warns that networks judged acceptable for email and video can become unacceptable for low-latency live audio, and calls a clean Wi-Fi channel plus network priority for the audio \"paramount\".", "Gives about 125 kbps per connected user and recommends that the system's traffic make up no more than 20% of the network's total bandwidth. It requires Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) or better, recommends enterprise-grade 802.11ax equipment, and says consumer- and business-grade routers do not always have the features or computing power needed.", "Recommends quality of service: the server tags its audio packets for priority by default, and access points should have Wireless Multimedia Extensions (WMM) enabled. It advises against range extenders and mesh or multi-hop networks, which it says may add latency, stuttering or dropouts.", "Explains that guest networks usually include client isolation, which stops phones from reaching the server and disables multicast DNS, so the server's address has to be added to the guest network's allowed list. Where a VLAN is used, the server and the phones generally need to be on the same one.", "Lists the ports to open, among them UDP 5353 for discovery, HTTPS 443 and port 90 for the app's text and images, UDP 16384 for the app and a range of dynamic ports for the audio.", "States that audio streaming does not need internet access, but the server needs the maker's cloud services for initial setup, firmware updates and in-app features such as banner ads, offers and documents.", "Describes a welcome ad (image or video) shown in the app, and a server port that serves welcome and banner ads." ], "limitations": "A maker's configuration note with no measurements. The bandwidth figure and the 20% guideline are the maker's own, and the note gives no number of listeners per access point. The date is the revision printed on the note (15 August 2024). The previous revision (V3, 28 April 2022) said that audio is streamed to each phone by unicast, and recommended an open network without encryption because encryption can lower the number of users per access point and add latency; the 2024 revision leaves out both statements. The maker now sells the system as ListenWIFI.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "rootlieb-2024", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rootlieb-2024/", "title": "Remote self-testing for adult cochlear implant users: the effect of wireless streaming on speech recognition in noise", "authors": "Rootlieb JM, Polspoel S, Brienesse P, Smits C", "publisher": "International Journal of Audiology 64(4):314-319 (2025)", "date": "2024-08-05", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (bench measurement and listening test)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Amsterdam UMC; no funder is named and the authors report no conflict of interest)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1080/14992027.2024.2382201", "summary": "Compared sound sent into cochlear implant processors through a telecoil and neckloop, Bluetooth and two remote-microphone accessories with sound from a loudspeaker, and tested speech in noise through each route with normal-hearing listeners.", "findings": [ "Speech-shaped noise was sent from a phone, or a laptop for the neckloop route, to free-standing processors (Cochlear Nucleus 7, Advanced Bionics Naída Marvel, MED-EL Sonnet 2) by loudspeaker, Bluetooth, a Cochlear Mini Mic 2+, a Phonak Roger Select with Roger 20 receiver, and a telecoil with a Phonak Roger Neckloop (Nucleus 7 only), with the processor microphones disabled for each wireless route except MED-EL AudioStream, whose mix could not be adjusted; the output was recorded through each maker's listening-check accessory.", "On the Nucleus 7, the differences from loudspeaker presentation were generally under 5 dB above 500 Hz and larger in some lower third-octave bands; the authors attribute them mainly to the narrower bandwidth of wireless streaming, whose codecs limit the upper frequency to about 7-7.3 kHz.", "Twenty normal-hearing adults took the digits-in-noise test through headphones fed from the processors; speech reception thresholds did not differ significantly between the five routes on the Nucleus 7, or between Bluetooth and loudspeaker for any of the three brands.", "The authors note that the neckloop's placement significantly affected the volume and that the telecoil route is sensitive to magnetic interference and took more effort to set up; they recommend digital streaming for remote testing.", "For the MED-EL processor, Bluetooth needed an AudioStream adapter, which does not let the user change the mixing ratio or switch off the processor microphone.", "In Experiment 1, Results (printed page 316, Figure 1), the Nucleus 7 third-octave spectra are aligned at 1 kHz; the authors state that absolute levels are arbitrary. The reported differences therefore compare spectral shape after alignment, not absolute output. Experiment 1, Methods, explains that the AudioStream microphone remained active in a soundproof booth with negligible expected background noise.", "Experiment 1, Methods (printed page 316), says the Roger Neckloop could not connect to the smartphone, so an Apple MacBook Air played the same audio. A check using the Roger Select found no output difference between phone and laptop presentation.", "Experiment 1, Methods (printed page 315), describes listening-check outputs feeding a Samson Servo 120a amplifier and Sennheiser HDA 200 headphones on a Bruel & Kjaer 4153 artificial ear connected to a 2250 sound level meter. The setup was calibrated to 65 dBA for each condition; that is an acoustic output calibration, not a neckloop magnetic-field measurement.", "Experiment 1, Methods (printed pages 315-316), says optional processor preprocessing was disabled. The Roger Neckloop was suspended around the Nucleus 7 processor in telecoil mode, with its microphone disabled. Table 1 assigns the telecoil condition only to Nucleus 7; the article does not report repeat units for that condition." ], "limitations": "Tested with normal-hearing listeners hearing the processors' monitor output, not with implant users, which the authors say cannot be fully generalised; a laboratory set-up with personal devices, not a venue system, and the telecoil route tested on one processor only. Published online on 5 August 2024, open access, in the April 2025 issue.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "audiologyonline-2024-auracast-20q", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/audiologyonline-2024-auracast-20q/", "title": "20Q: Auracast is Here - What You Need to Know", "authors": "Bellavia A; introductory commentary by Gus Mueller", "publisher": "AudiologyOnline, article 28985", "date": "2024-07-08", "kind": "Professional education article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (Andrew Bellavia, AuraFuturity hearing-sector marketing consultant and Tuned advisory-board member; formerly with Knowles; article funding unstated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/20q-auracast-28985", "summary": "A professional education interview explains early Auracast use and anticipates changes to hearing care support.", "findings": [ "In question 18, Bellavia describes the phone assistant as a broadcast-selection interface and judges the then-current Samsung assistant difficult for inexperienced technology users, anticipating easier interfaces.", "Questions 5 and 10 predict that standardisation will make connectivity more reliable and easier for hearing care professionals to support; these are expectations, not measured clinical outcomes.", "In question 20, Bellavia hopes easier support will encourage hearing care professionals to introduce patients to connectivity in public venues as well as at home and work.", "The tutorial gives no audit of fitted devices, clinical activation rate or tested Auracast fitting protocol." ], "limitations": "Expert commentary from an industry consultant and hearing aid user, not a clinical study or professional association guideline. Its July 2024 device examples and forecasts are historical. The public article was readable without membership; no course enrolment or assessment was accessed.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "hhs-2024-section-1557-effective-communication", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hhs-2024-section-1557-effective-communication/", "title": "45 CFR 92.202: effective communication for individuals with disabilities (Section 1557 regulation)", "authors": "US Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights", "publisher": "eCFR", "date": "2024-07-05", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Health and Human Services)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/subchapter-A/part-92/subpart-C/section-92.202", "summary": "The rule under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act that requires health programs receiving federal funds to communicate as effectively with patients and companions who have disabilities as with others, providing auxiliary aids such as assistive listening devices free of charge.", "findings": [ "Requires a covered entity to take appropriate steps so that communications with individuals with disabilities, including companions with disabilities, are as effective as communications with others in its health programs and activities, following the ADA Title II standards in 28 CFR 35.130 and 35.160 to 35.164, with \"covered entity\" read in place of \"public entity\".", "Requires appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to give people with disabilities an equal opportunity to take part in and benefit from the health program or activity, provided free of charge, in accessible formats, in a timely manner and in a way that protects the privacy and independence of the individual.", "The definitions in the same part (section 92.4) list assistive listening devices, assistive listening systems, telephone handset amplifiers and telephones compatible with hearing aids among the auxiliary aids for people who are deaf or hard of hearing.", "Section 92.4 defines a covered entity as a recipient of federal financial assistance, the Department of Health and Human Services itself, or an entity established under Title I of the Affordable Care Act." ], "limitations": "A general duty that names no technology for any setting and sets no performance limits or numbers of devices. Read from the eCFR text in force on 1 October 2026 (sections 92.202 and 92.4); the date is the section's latest amendment shown by eCFR, from the 2024 final rule. The incorporated Title II standards, including primary consideration of the aid a person asks for, are in 28 CFR 35.160, a separate record in this library.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "ised-2024-rss-210", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ised-2024-rss-210/", "title": "RSS-210, Issue 11: Licence-Exempt Radio Apparatus: Category I Equipment (Annex C: medical telemetry, wireless microphones, auditory assistance, goods tracking and law enforcement devices)", "authors": "Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)", "publisher": "Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada", "date": "2024-06-25", "kind": "Regulation (Canada, licence-exempt radio apparatus)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/devices-and-equipment/radio-equipment-standards/radio-standards-specifications-rss/rss-210-licence-exempt-radio-apparatus-category-i-equipment", "summary": "Canada's certification rules for licence-exempt radio devices, including auditory assistance transmitters at 72-76 MHz and 216-217 MHz.", "findings": [ "Says 72-73, 74.6-74.8 and 75.2-76.0 MHz are used exclusively for auditory assistance and wireless microphones, with a 200 kHz authorised bandwidth, an average field strength of no more than 80 mV/m at 3 m inside it and 1.5 mV/m outside it.", "Elsewhere (Annex A) lists carrier frequencies in 72-73 MHz for radio control of model aircraft and in 75.4-76 MHz for general remote controls.", "Opens 216-217 MHz to auditory assistance, medical telemetry, goods tracking and law enforcement devices at up to 100 mW peak output and 160 mW e.i.r.p., with 5, 12.5, 25 or 50 kHz channel plans; law enforcement has exclusive use of 216.45-216.50 MHz.", "States that all 216-217 MHz transmissions are on a no-interference, no-protection basis, especially with respect to TV channel 13 (210-216 MHz), and advises avoiding 216-216.3 MHz, where channel 13's sound carrier image falls.", "Requires the user manual to tell installers near an active channel 13 to reduce or adjust power, to test with a TV set with a rabbit-ear antenna tuned to channel 13 at the perimeter of the coverage area, and otherwise to use a channel near 217 MHz rather than 216 MHz." ], "limitations": "Certification rules for transmitters: nothing on audio quality, coverage or receivers. It does not explain how the 72-76 MHz bands can be exclusive to auditory assistance and wireless microphones while Annex A also lists model aircraft and remote control frequencies there. Issue 11 is dated 25 June 2024; the text read was the version online on 9 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "pro-audito-2024-eth-user-test", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pro-audito-2024-eth-user-test/", "title": "Auracast: the webinar and the results of the Pro Audito and ETH Zurich test", "authors": "Pro Audito Schweiz; questionnaire evaluation by ETH Zurich students Kaufmann R and Brasser A; product tests by Graf B", "publisher": "Pro Audito Schweiz (in German)", "date": "2024-06-20", "kind": "User trial (summary)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Pro Audito Schweiz, Swiss hearing-loss association, with ETH Zurich students)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pro-audito.ch/news/auracast-so-war-das-webinar-und-das-sind-die-ergebnisse/", "summary": "A summary of a test day on which participants, mostly with hearing loss, compared early Auracast equipment with existing assistive listening in several situations.", "findings": [ "In the first test situation, 23 participants rated speech quality with Auracast as equal to or better than with an induction loop.", "After a guided tour, 31 of 32 participants rated the audio quality with Auracast, compared with no assistive system, as very good or good.", "The product tests found Auracast's advantage over FM and infrared to be that one personal receiver works with any Auracast system, while induction loops remained simpler to use because Auracast then required a smartphone to operate hearing devices.", "Presented latency as a central criterion for judging assistive listening systems.", "Reports that 23 participants rated Auracast's speech quality as equal to or better than the loop's; the summary does not give the total number of participants in that comparison." ], "limitations": "A news summary of questionnaire results. The number of participants in the first situation, the equipment and the method are not given here; the full report appeared in Pro Audito's member magazine. First-generation equipment, tested in 2024.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "finding-and-joining", "listener-preference", "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "redback-2024-hearing-loop-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/redback-2024-hearing-loop-manual/", "title": "Redback A 4210 80VA / A 4212 280VA Hearing Induction Loop Amplifiers: Operating Manual, revision 1.2", "authors": "Altronic Distributors", "publisher": "Altronic Distributors (manufacturer PDF hosted by Wiltronics)", "date": "2024-06-17", "kind": "Manufacturer operating manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Altronic Distributors, maker of Redback amplifiers)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.wiltronics.com.au/wp-content/uploads/datasheets/redback-hearing-induction-loop-amplifier-280va-instructions.pdf", "summary": "A loop-amplifier manual documents a dedicated emergency input that can take priority over microphone and programme inputs.", "findings": [ "Page 4 describes audio feeding an amplifier and loop, with reception by the telecoil in a hearing aid. It identifies an EWIS input for connection to venue emergency evacuation systems.", "Page 8 describes an emergency controller or tone generator feeding the EWIS input. When the enabled voice-operated switching circuit detects audio on that input, it overrides microphone, line and auxiliary inputs.", "Pages 8–9 describe adjustable sensitivity and a switch that enables or disables this priority function, so the emergency input’s behaviour depends on configuration.", "Page 4 specifies 240 V AC operation. Page 9 says the amplifier shuts down on excessive temperature to prevent damage." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer instructions for two models, read as the original manufacturer PDF from a reseller. No independent evacuation trial, battery endurance test or assessment to a fire-alarm standard is reported. The emergency input is evidence of an audio-routing capability, not of emergency availability throughout a venue.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "vocaleyes-2024-state-of-theatre-access", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/vocaleyes-2024-state-of-theatre-access/", "title": "State of Theatre Access 2023", "authors": "Fryer L (for VocalEyes, Stagetext and the Centre for Accessible Environments)", "publisher": "VocalEyes, Stagetext and the Centre for Accessible Environments (published on Stagetext's website)", "date": "2024-06-17", "kind": "Paper (survey of UK theatre websites by volunteer researchers)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (three UK access charities, VocalEyes, Stagetext and the Centre for Accessible Environments, coordinated the survey with volunteer researchers who have lived experience of access barriers; written by Louise Fryer, an independent researcher and audio describer; funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://stagetext.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/State-of-Theatre-Access-2023-PDF-1.pdf", "summary": "A review of the access information on the websites of 465 professional UK theatres in April and May 2023, the fourth in a series that began in 2016.", "findings": [ "Volunteers reviewed the websites of 797 professional UK theatres in April and May 2023; 465 met the scope (at least one upcoming professional production), down from 659 in 2017 and 629 in 2019.", "Counts 364 venues (78%) as \"equipped with a Hearing Loop\", from what their websites showed, and reads the remaining 22% as failing to meet \"this basic access requirement\"; it does not count infrared, radio or Wi-Fi systems.", "15% of the websites gave no access information at all, and where information existed it was often hard to find; 401 (86%) gave contact details for access enquiries, with a named access person or team in 102 cases (22%).", "Some websites named the equipment used for audio description, including Sennheiser MobileConnect with a limited number of headsets or the visitor's own device, a Sennheiser infrared system, and headphone-style receivers; two required headsets to be booked 24 hours or 10 days in advance.", "Only 55 venues (12%) reserved seats for access performances, which the report says can matter for good headset reception for audio description.", "Recommends that websites state the type of headset used to deliver audio description, and give information about access equipment the venue can provide, especially if patrons must bring their own." ], "limitations": "A survey of what websites say, not of what venues have or whether it works: the loop count rests on website content, and the report gives no definition of what counted. The authors say volunteers' on-the-spot judgements may differ between people and years, and that shared websites (such as a theatre group's) mean websites and theatres do not correspond exactly. UK only. Dated from the publishers' announcement (17 June 2024); the PDF was created on 2 May 2024.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2024-infocomm-t3", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2024-infocomm-t3/", "title": "Williams AV Unveils Three New Products at InfoComm 2024", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV (news release)", "date": "2024-06-06", "kind": "Manufacturer press release", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, which announced new hearing loop, intercom and infrared products in this release)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/williams-av-unveils-three-new-products-at-infocomm-2024/", "summary": "A maker's release announcing a new infrared transmitter for assistive listening, alongside a loop amplifier and an intercom.", "findings": [ "Announces the SoundPlus T3 as \"the latest addition\" to the maker's infrared product line, one of three new products that expand its hearing loop, intercom and infrared lines.", "Says the T3 uses the newest generation of LEDs to give 50 percent more coverage than the existing T2 model, and can be controlled and monitored by third-party room systems over Ethernet.", "Names conference rooms, assisted living facilities, cinemas and theatres, classrooms and courtrooms as uses, for assistive listening and language interpretation." ], "limitations": "A product announcement without test data; the coverage gain is the maker's own claim.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "infrared-limits" ] }, { "id": "loop-oregon-2024-meeting-facilities", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/loop-oregon-2024-meeting-facilities/", "title": "A survey of 50 of Oregon’s largest meeting facilities about their provision of assistive listening systems as required by the ADA", "authors": "Loop Oregon Committee", "publisher": "Loop Oregon, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts", "date": "2024-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Paper (facility survey report)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Loop Oregon volunteer committee, supported by The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts; no separate study funding stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/Shedd-50-OR-Meeting-Facilities-ALS-Survey-Summary.pdf", "summary": "A volunteer website and telephone survey of 50 large Oregon meeting facilities found limited information and reported provision.", "findings": [ "Page 2, What the Websites Had to Say, reports no accessibility information on 24 websites and hearing-loss-related information on 14, from the 50-facility list. Website claims were reviewed separately from telephone accounts of provision.", "Page 3, What We Were Told, says two facilities were trying to improve their systems, describes hygiene concerns and receiver problems, and notes tentative interest in hearing loops from a couple of facilities. The report does not identify the exact interview question that elicited these comments. Page 1 prints the planned questions but says interviewers rarely progressed beyond the opening question.", "Five volunteers began in January 2024 using a published list of 50 facilities. Two had ceased public meeting use and 14 did not respond.", "Page 2 lists two reported hearing loops, six other systems whose type staff could not identify, and 26 facilities reporting no system or accommodations. Seven respondents assigned responsibility to event renters. Page 3 identifies 34 responding facilities.", "One facility reported four FM packs for meetings. Staff also reported receiver difficulties and hygiene concerns.", "Pages 3–4 (What We Were Told and What We Learned) describe staff uncertainty about hearing loss and the systems available at their facilities. These are the surveyors' observations from conversations, without a scored staff-knowledge assessment." ], "limitations": "Informal, non-random staff-report survey, without equipment tests or participant listening scores. Categories overlap; page 3 describes six of 48 as having accommodation, whereas page 2 separately lists two loops and six other systems. Do not derive a failure rate or listener preference. June 2024 date from the hosting organisation’s conference resource page.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "baert-2024", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/baert-2024/", "title": "Evaluation of BLE-based audio broadcasting under probabilistic interference", "authors": "Baert M, Moons B, Pittevils J, Song Y, Madhu N, Hoebeke J", "publisher": "Computer Communications 222:130-140", "date": "2024-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Ghent University and imec; funding from imec and Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship; co-author Jowan Pittevils is affiliated with manufacturer Cochlear)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140366424001634", "summary": "Simulates a Bluetooth LE broadcast exposed to interference, with audio-frame retransmissions, and evaluates how well packet loss concealment hides lost frames.", "findings": [ "More advanced packet loss concealment techniques tolerated a higher frame-loss rate.", "Large audio frames that must be split across packets lost more frames for the same Bluetooth packet loss rate.", "Overlap with Wi-Fi (802.11) channels in use made frame loss vary widely.", "The accepted manuscript lists Jowan Pittevils under Cochlear on its title page. Its Acknowledgments attribute funding to the imec.icon BLE2AV project, financed by imec and Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship; a manufacturer affiliation is not evidence of manufacturer funding.", "The manuscript author block lists Jowan Pittevils at Cochlear; the acknowledgments name the imec.icon BLE2AV project, financed by imec and Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship. Sections 6 and 7 evaluate simulated losses using 20 speech recordings, not a listener sample." ], "limitations": "Simulation of interference patterns, not field measurements. The archived accepted manuscript was read; its footer identifies a preprint submitted in June 2023. The final 2024 publisher text was not available for comparison. Audio quality and intelligibility were predicted using instrumental measures, without listener testing.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "signal-target", "interference" ] }, { "id": "palmer-zitelli-2024", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/palmer-zitelli-2024/", "title": "Chapter 3: Setting the Hearing Aid Response and Verifying Signal Processing and Features in the Test Box", "authors": "Palmer C, Zitelli L", "publisher": "Seminars in Hearing 45(2):172-204 (Thieme)", "date": "2024-05-17", "kind": "Paper (tutorial chapter in a themed journal issue on test-box and real-ear measurement)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Communication Science and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh; no conflict of interest declared; the step-by-step procedures are written for Audioscan's Verifit test system)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11161217/", "summary": "A clinical tutorial that includes how to check a hearing aid's telecoil programme in a test box, for telephone use and for room loops.", "findings": [ "Says that a telecoil ordered on a hearing aid should be verified as working before the aid is dispensed, and that for loop listening the telecoil programme must be set appropriately and the user must be able to engage it.", "Uses the hearing aid's ANSI test as the target: with the microphone programme fitted and verified, the telecoil output should match the reference test gain. For telephones, SPLITS is measured on a telephone magnetic field simulator with the aid moved to maximise output, and RSETS compares it with the microphone; for room loops, SPLIV is measured with the aid held vertically as worn, and relative test loop sensitivity compares it with the microphone. The goal for both differences is 0 dB.", "Notes that in many modern hearing aids the telecoil can be programmed separately for phone use and for room-loop use.", "Warns that in open fittings, where the microphone programme gives little low-frequency gain because natural sound reaches the ear, a telecoil programme set identically will lack low frequencies; it advises a telecoil response with more low-frequency gain than the microphone, giving the telephone's mainly low- and mid-frequency response as the reason.", "Advises practising with the patient how to switch into the telecoil programme, adjust its volume and switch back to normal listening." ], "limitations": "A teaching chapter with a worked example (RSETS 0 dB, relative test loop sensitivity -0.5 dB), not a study of fitted devices. Its procedures follow one maker's test equipment, and it does not say how often the checks are done in practice.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "norway-2024-melhus-hearing-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/norway-2024-melhus-hearing-loops/", "title": "Sak 2023/186: vedtak av 6. mai 2024 (public version)", "authors": "Diskrimineringsnemnda", "publisher": "Diskrimineringsnemnda (Norwegian Anti-Discrimination Tribunal)", "date": "2024-05-06", "kind": "Regulatory enforcement (tribunal decision)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Norwegian Anti-Discrimination Tribunal)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.diskrimineringsnemnda.no/media/mq5fafzc/sak-2023-186-offentlig-versjon-av-vedtak.pdf", "summary": "Norway’s tribunal found a municipality’s missing or non-working loops discriminatory, ordered working provision at its town hall and medical-centre reception, and set a deadline backed by a possible daily penalty.", "findings": [ "The unanimous decision dated 6 May 2024 concerned a complaint lodged on 26 February 2023. This public version calls the respondent B municipality; the later penalty decision in the same case identifies Melhus.", "Pages 4-6 apply sections 12 and 17 of the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Act. The tribunal found a breach of the universal-design duty in public-facing municipal premises, using building-regulation requirements as guidance also for older buildings.", "The municipality acknowledged inadequate hearing access and had promised equipment by the end of 2023. The tribunal found no documentation that working provision was in place and no basis for the disproportionate-burden exception in this case.", "Page 7 orders working loops in the council chamber, cultural hall, reception counter and library in the town hall, and the medical-centre reception. Installation and evidence of completion were due by 15 June 2024.", "Pages 8-9 set a coercive penalty of NOK 3,000 per working day including Saturday, which the tribunal chair could activate if the order was not fulfilled by the deadline. This decision does not establish that the penalty was already accruing.", "The tribunal considered installation an important barrier-removal measure with relatively low costs in relation to municipal resources; that assessment was specific to the case." ], "limitations": "Norwegian-language decision, summarised in English. The first public version anonymises the municipality and health centre. It gives an order, not proof of subsequent completion; the 25 February 2025 decision supplies follow-up. Its cost assessment is not a published installation quote or a general rule for every venue.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "complaints-and-cases" ] }, { "id": "dft-2024-bus-accessible-information", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dft-2024-bus-accessible-information/", "title": "Providing accessible information onboard local bus and coach services", "authors": "Department for Transport", "publisher": "GOV.UK", "date": "2024-04-26", "kind": "Regulatory guidance (Public Service Vehicles (Accessible Information) Regulations 2023)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (UK Department for Transport)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/providing-accessible-information-onboard-local-bus-and-coach-services/providing-accessible-information-onboard-local-bus-and-coach-services", "summary": "The Department for Transport's guidance to operators on the 2023 regulations that require audible and visible next-stop information on local buses and coaches in Great Britain, including an induction loop at priority seats and wheelchair spaces.", "findings": [ "Under the Public Service Vehicles (Accessible Information) Regulations 2023, local bus and coach services in England, Scotland and Wales must give route, upcoming stop, termination and diversion information in audio and visual form. Vehicles first used from 1 October 2019 must comply by 1 October 2024, those first used from 1 October 2014 by 1 October 2025, and those first used from 1 January 1973 by 1 October 2026.", "Says relevant information \"must be made available to someone that uses a hearing aid in conjunction with an audio frequency induction loop ... when they are seated in a priority seat or wheelchair space\", and that further information given beyond the legal minimum should also be available through the loop.", "Recommends working with suppliers to avoid audio interference, and a schedule for regularly testing the loop \"because its operation may not be apparent to a driver or engineer who does not use a compatible hearing aid\". Signs next to priority seats and wheelchair spaces should show the loop symbol with a T.", "Suggests operators consider an additional, separate induction loop so that passengers who are deaf or hard of hearing can talk with the driver when boarding or alighting, signed as available, and says audible advertisements should not be sent through the loop.", "Says that making passengers use their smartphones does not by itself meet the law, because relevant information must be provided on board and be available to any passenger; it notes that the share of disabled people with smartphones remains significantly lower than in the population as a whole.", "Sets announcement volume at least 3 dB above the measured ambient level at any seat or wheelchair space, with a maximum of 84 dB.", "The regulations themselves (SI 2023/715, regulations 12 and 13) require information in both audio and visual form, require audio information to be capable of being heard by a hearing aid user in a priority seat or wheelchair space, define the loop as one usable with \"a working telecoil hearing aid\", and say an operator \"must not require passengers to use a personal electronic device\" to receive relevant information, without defining that term.", "Neither the guidance nor the regulations mention Bluetooth or Auracast.", "The vehicle-age timetable separates first use on or after 1 October 2019 (application from 1 October 2024), 1 October 2014 to 30 September 2019 (from 1 October 2025), and 1 January 1973 to 30 September 2014 (from 1 October 2026). Vehicles qualifying for the guidance's separate status for partially equipped vehicles have an application date of 1 October 2031.", "The sections on existing information systems and implementation dates allow vehicles meeting specified audio and visual conditions from 1 October 2023 until 1 October 2031 to meet the remaining requirements, including regulation 13 on audible information and the loop. The minibus exemption depends on design capacity (16 or fewer passengers); the heritage exemption is tied to first use before 1 January 1973.", "The Using websites and apps passage says required information must be provided onboard and available to any passenger; it does not limit this to priority seats or wheelchair spaces. The existing-information-system transition lists regulations 8(2), 10, 11, 13 and 14, with specified exceptions, rather than the general onboard-information duty." ], "limitations": "Guidance on regulations, read from the HTML version updated on 17 October 2024 (a change adding a temporary exemption for rail replacement coaches). The loop duty covers priority seats and wheelchair spaces, not the whole vehicle, and the guidance names no loop performance standard. Exemptions include services using vehicles designed for 16 or fewer passengers, qualifying excursions and tours, vehicles first used before 1 January 1973, and demand-responsive transport; some existing information systems have a further transition period to 2031. The regulations themselves (SI 2023/715, made 27 June 2023) were read only for the clauses summarised in the findings.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "dft-2024-accessible-information-grant", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dft-2024-accessible-information-grant/", "title": "£4.65 million for bus operators to help disabled passengers travel with confidence", "authors": "Department for Transport and Guy Opperman", "publisher": "UK Department for Transport", "date": "2024-04-08", "kind": "Press release (government grant launch)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Government (UK Department for Transport)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.gov.uk/government/news/465-million-for-bus-operators-to-help-disabled-passengers-travel-with-confidence", "summary": "The 2024 Accessible Information Grant launch offered small bus and coach operators support for audible and visual journey information, explicitly including induction loops.", "findings": [ "Announced applications opening on 8 April 2024 for a share of £4.65 million for small bus and coach operators, supporting accessible information on services across Great Britain.", "Names screens, speakers and induction loops as equipment the grant would help small operators fit.", "Links the funding to regulations for accessible journey announcements." ], "limitations": "Historical launch announcement, not evidence that funding remains available. It provides neither full eligibility rules nor individual award amounts. The separate RTIG notice of 4 March 2026 reports the application closure.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "efhoh-2024-en-17210", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/efhoh-2024-en-17210/", "title": "EU standard for hearing access in the built environment", "authors": "European Federation of Hard of Hearing People (EFHOH)", "publisher": "EFHOH", "date": "2024-03-14", "kind": "Advocacy resource (summary of EN 17210:2021)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (European federation of hard of hearing people's organisations; its site states that its 2024-2026 publications are co-funded by the EU CERV programme)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://efhoh.org/2024/03/eu-standard-for-hearing-access-in-the-built-environment/", "summary": "A hearing-loss federation's summary of what the European built-environment accessibility standard EN 17210:2021 says about assistive listening, acoustics and alarms.", "findings": [ "Reports that EN 17210:2021 defines assistive listening systems as a direct wire system, an inductive loop, infrared, radio frequency or Wi-Fi, and says which to use depends on the application and conditions.", "Reports that the standard lists places where assistive listening should be installed, including meeting rooms, lecture halls, classrooms, performance halls, sports and film venues, reception counters, service desks, courts, museums, religious buildings and lifts.", "Stresses signage showing that a system is present, and reports that the standard requires the acoustic and electromagnetic environment to support assistive devices and has an annex on management and maintenance, including staff training on assistive listening systems.", "EFHOH writes that induction loops are often recommended as the best solution, because they alone have a globally accepted installation standard (IEC 60118-4) and deliver sound straight to hearing aids with a telecoil.", "Says the standard runs to some 300 pages in English, French and German and must be bought from national standards bodies." ], "limitations": "A secondary summary by an advocacy federation that favours loops; the standard itself (paid) was not read for this record, and the article gives no clause numbers, receiver counts or coverage figures. EFHOH's statement that EN 17210 will be the standard for assessing accessibility in publicly funded developments is its own reading. The European Commission's AccessibleEU library notes that the standard is being revised under standardisation request M/587.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "loop-verification", "wifi-networks", "loop-and-auracast", "signage-and-awareness", "places-of-worship", "courts-and-chambers", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "samsung-2024-auracast-buds-update", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/samsung-2024-auracast-buds-update/", "title": "Experience Immersive, Intelligent Sound with Galaxy Buds Series' Latest Updates", "authors": "Samsung Electronics", "publisher": "Samsung US Newsroom", "date": "2024-02-22", "kind": "Manufacturer announcement", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Samsung)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://news.samsung.com/us/experience-immersive-intelligent-sound-samsung-galaxy-buds-series-latest-updates/", "summary": "Samsung's February 2024 earbud update announcement specifies different phone and One UI requirements for broadcasting and for selecting a broadcast to hear through Galaxy Buds.", "findings": [ "Footnote 2 lists broadcast listening on Galaxy S24 series, S23 series, Z Fold5, Z Fold4, Z Flip5, Z Flip4, A54 5G and M54 5G with One UI 5.1.1 or later; tablets are listed separately.", "The same footnote lists broadcasting on S24 series, S23 series, Z Fold5 and Z Flip5 with One UI 6.1 or later, plus the Tab S9 series.", "The Auracast paragraph concerns Galaxy Buds2 Pro. The wider announcement covers several earbud updates; that does not establish Auracast reception on every earbud named elsewhere in the article.", "Samsung says the update rollout begins in late February and that availability varies by market and model and requires the latest software through Galaxy Wearable." ], "limitations": "Historical manufacturer rollout information about an earbud listening route. It does not establish hearing-aid assistant interoperability or native phone audio reception. The S23-series shorthand does not settle FE variants, which a later Samsung list names separately.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "listen-2024-lwr1050-receiver", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2024-lwr1050-receiver/", "title": "ListenWIFI Wi-Fi Audio Receiver (LWR-1050)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (product page)", "date": "2024-02-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the ListenWIFI system and receiver described, which also sells RF/FM, infrared, hearing loop and Auracast assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/shop/product/listenwifi-wi-fi-audio-receiver/", "summary": "Listen Technologies' product page and specifications for its dedicated ListenWIFI receiver, which venues lend to listeners instead of relying on their phones.", "findings": [ "Its specification table gives the system latency as \"40-60 ms, dependent on network, traffic, and QOS\".", "Its architect's specification on the same page says the receiver shall have \"audio latency of less than 40 mS on a good and properly configured network\".", "Describes a handheld receiver for the 2.4 and 5 GHz Wi-Fi bands that streams 125 kbps audio from ListenWIFI servers, with a 3.5 mm socket for wired headphones or an induction neckloop for telecoil users; the page lists no Bluetooth audio output.", "Presents the receiver as a way for venues to meet accessibility requirements and calls it ideal for classrooms, places of worship and theatres, with \"Industry-leading latency\"." ], "limitations": "A maker's product page: the latency figures come without a method, a measurement point or network conditions, and its two figures differ (40-60 ms in the table, under 40 ms in the architect's text). The date is the page's publication date in its metadata; it was last modified on 3 September 2026, and the page says specifications are subject to change without notice. The maker's page for its 2-channel server gives the same 40-60 ms and adds that it depends on the listening device.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "wifi-latency", "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "mncdhh-2024-loop-exemptions-report", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/mncdhh-2024-loop-exemptions-report/", "title": "Biennial exemptions report: Accommodation for hard-of-hearing in state-funded capital projects", "authors": "Minnesota Commission of the Deaf, DeafBlind & Hard of Hearing", "publisher": "Minnesota Commission of the Deaf, DeafBlind & Hard of Hearing (report to the Minnesota Legislature, held by the Legislative Reference Library)", "date": "2024-01-30", "kind": "Regulatory report (exemptions under a state statute)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Minnesota Commission of the Deaf, DeafBlind & Hard of Hearing, a state commission)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.lrl.mn.gov/docs/2024/mandated/240302.pdf", "summary": "Minnesota's commission reports to the legislature on exemptions from the state law that requires hearing loops in state-funded public gathering spaces.", "findings": [ "The statute reproduced on printed page 3 covers state-funded capital construction or renovation of public gathering spaces in buildings for at least 15 people where audible communication is integral. Subdivision 2(1) conditions the loop requirement on existing or planned permanent amplification; subdivision 2(2) states the ANSI school background-noise and reverberation criteria separately. The page 4 application clause covers appropriations enacted after 1 January 2017, subject to its completed-design exception.", "Printed page 3, subdivision 1, defines a public gathering space as a space constructed or renovated as part of the project that accommodates and is intended for gatherings of 15 or more people, with audible communication integral to a use of the space. Subdivision 2 concerns these spaces in buildings.", "Quotes Minnesota Statutes 16C.054: no state contract or grant may fund building or renovating a public gathering space for 15 or more people that has or will have a permanent audio-amplification system unless the project includes audio-induction loops and meets ANSI acoustical criteria for schools on background noise and reverberation. It applies to projects funded by appropriations enacted after 1 January 2017.", "The statute text it quotes requires loops but names no performance standard for them.", "Reports one exemption request in 2022-2023, still under review when the report was written.", "States that applicants do not have to tell the Commission when projects follow the law, \"so the Commission has no data about any projects that may have followed the statute\".", "The statute reproduced on printed page 3, subdivision 3, permits an exemption after consultation with the Commission where a requirement is infeasible, conflicts with law or other project requirements, or costs outweigh benefits. The effective-date provision on page 4 also excludes projects whose schematic design was already complete when the section took effect." ], "limitations": "Covers exemptions only: it records no installations, measurements or test results, so it says nothing about how installed loops perform. Minnesota state-funded projects only.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "loop-verification", "lifetime-costs", "courts-and-chambers", "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "healthwatch-east-sussex-2024-gp-accessibility", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/healthwatch-east-sussex-2024-gp-accessibility/", "title": "GP Accessibility Visits 2023 (Eastbourne GP surgeries accessibility audits)", "authors": "Healthwatch East Sussex", "publisher": "Healthwatch East Sussex (reports library of Healthwatch England)", "date": "2024-01-09", "kind": "Local audit report (lay field audits)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Government (Healthwatch East Sussex, the county's statutory health and social care watchdog; the audits were made by its staff and volunteers, with support from primary care commissioners at NHS Sussex)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://nds.healthwatch.co.uk/sites/default/files/reports_library/20240109_ESussex_Eastbourne%20GP%20Accessiblity%20Project.pdf", "summary": "Lay accessibility audits of seven GP surgery sites in Eastbourne in 2023, including hearing loops at reception and portable loops for consultations.", "findings": [ "The staff-knowledge evidence is internally inconsistent: the narrative on printed page 9 says three surgeries with loops reported staff would know how to check operation, while the Reception Area table on printed page 6 records one positive, one partially met, two negative and three not applicable. The report does not reconcile these counts. These categories are defined on printed page 4.", "Teams of two or three Healthwatch staff and volunteers audited seven surgery sites of five GP practices between July and October 2023 with a checklist, joined by a member of surgery staff or of the patient participation group.", "Four of the seven sites had hearing loops installed, all four with loop signs in reception, one of them low in contrast and hard to see. Three of the four reported that staff would know how to check that the loop is switched on and working, and only one had procedures in place to check regularly that it is on and working.", "Only one site had a portable hearing loop available for one-to-one discussion; the checklist asked whether doctors have portable hearing loops for patient appointments, \"allowing confidentiality\".", "Recommended hearing loops throughout public areas at every site, portable loops for staff to use in one-to-one conversations, training for all staff in testing that the loop works, a regular testing schedule, and clear signs." ], "limitations": "A pilot of a lay checklist at seven sites in one town, chosen from the practices that replied. The report does not say that loops were measured or tried by hearing aid users, and staff knowledge was as reported by the sites. The report is undated beyond the 2023 visits; Healthwatch England's library lists it on 9 January 2024.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "ccaa-2024", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ccaa-2024/", "title": "Consumer use of and preferences for assistive communication technology in public places", "authors": "Committee for Communication Access in America (Frazier SO, Bailey A, Cadwell B, Clifford C, Liebe K, Myers D, Sterkens J)", "publisher": "Committee for Communication Access in America", "date": "2024-01-08", "kind": "Paper (online consumer survey report)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (an ad hoc committee of hearing-loss advocates, chaired by Stephen O. Frazier (Loop New Mexico; a founding member of HLAA's Get in the Hearing Loop initiative), the report's correspondence author; funding not stated; data collected and analysed by the Frost Center for Data and Social Research at Hope College. The committee's site lists David Myers (founder of hearingloop.org) and Juliette Sterkens (HLAA hearing loop advocate) among its members, with Abram Bailey (founder of HearingTracker), Blake Cadwell (founder and CEO of Soundly), Kevin Liebe (hearinghealthmatters.org) and Carol Clifford (audiologist, former ReSound training director))", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ccaa.name/Report_Final_1-12-24.pdf", "summary": "A survey of 1,519 self-selected people with hearing loss or related conditions on how often they find, borrow and use assistive listening systems and captions in public venues, and which they prefer.", "findings": [ "62% said they seldom or never find hearing accommodations in public venues, and 47% avoid events they know have none (another 28% sometimes do).", "Where respondents found an audio system, it was an FM system (with or without neckloops) 51% of the time, a hearing loop 27% and infrared 14%, with Wi-Fi and others making up the rest.", "Only 37% always or usually borrow the equipment where a venue offers an assistive listening system with headsets, and 39% where it offers a neckloop; in a looped venue, the report gives 69% of respondents with telecoils as always using the system. In the committee's published response counts, 69% is always or usually (496 of 719); 367 of 719 (51%) always do.", "States that over 60% preferred hearing loops when choosing among five assistive listening technologies. Asked which single system a city council chamber should install, 61% of those giving an opinion chose CART or captions and 23% a hearing loop; of the 312 who chose one of the five listening systems, 187 (60%) chose the loop, which appears to be the basis of the over-60% figure. Auracast was not an option.", "52% knew their devices had a telecoil (70% counting telecoil-capable remote microphones), 17% have a telecoil but do not use it, and 17% knew nothing about telecoils before the survey. Among those answering yes or no, 96% called Bluetooth a must-have for their next hearing aids and 73% a telecoil.", "Common complaints included untrained staff, dead batteries, missing signage, loops with dead spots, unhygienic headsets, too few receivers, neckloops that did not work or were not offered, and delay.", "The respondent-comment list on printed page 6 also includes staff unable to locate devices, difficulty finding the on/off switch, uncomfortable headsets, long waits to return receivers and the overall effort involved. These are examples of reported problems, without a separate rate for each barrier or technology.", "Conclusions (pp. 7-8) lists equipment failures, checkout effort and making a disability visible among reported reasons for avoiding attendance. The consumer recommendations (pp. 8-9) ask listeners to give venue management positive and negative feedback and report missing or malfunctioning systems.", "Recommends adequate staff training, a good charging protocol and a simple lending and returning routine for loaned receivers; information on the venue's website, in programmes and with tickets, signs at all entrances and announcements at the start of events.", "Recommends that venues consider ease of use and consumers' preferences when acquiring a system, and that audiologists and dispensers give every patient information about hearing loops and telecoils and recommend hearing aids with telecoils whenever feasible.", "Nearly 23% of respondents had a cochlear or bone-anchored implant; its cross-tabulations are by age, experience and degree of loss, not by device.", "The Study Sample section (page 2) describes 1,519 volunteers with self-reported hearing loss or other hearing-related conditions; the Research Design section includes auditory processing disorder.", "The Study Sample section describes the 1,519 volunteers as having self-reported hearing loss or other hearing-related conditions; the research design also includes auditory processing disorder.", "In the section discussing venue systems, the report gives 16% for experience with Wi-Fi audio and 53% for distracting or objectionable delay. The companion response charts (CCAA_Graphs.pdf, Q23A-Q24, printed pages 27-28) give 217 reporting use but 251 substantive delay ratings (119 not conscious of delay, 88 distracting, 44 objectionable). Thus 132 of 251 ratings produce the rounded 53%; the charts do not establish that this is the same set of people who reported use." ], "limitations": "A self-selected online sample recruited through hearing-loss websites, newsletters and groups (Hearing Tracker, Hearing Health Foundation, Soundly and others): nearly 80% were seniors, 66% reported severe-to-profound loss, 23% had an implant, and 75% of the 42% in a support group belonged to HLAA. Several authors are long-standing hearing loop advocates or run hearing-related businesses, and funding is not stated. The report says some percentages differ from the Frost Center tables because \"not applicable\" answers were removed. The report gives no fieldwork dates; the committee's survey page gives 5 to 24 September 2023. The report is dated 8 January 2024, while its file name says 12 January. The response counts behind the percentages are published separately as charts (CCAA Survey on Assistive Communication Technology: Graphs, a separate record in this library).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "signage-and-awareness", "places-of-worship", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops", "courts-and-chambers", "healthcare-settings", "using-each-system", "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "roth-2024", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/roth-2024/", "title": "Effect of a processing delay between direct and delayed sound in simulated open fit hearing aids on speech intelligibility in noise", "authors": "Roth S, Müller F-U, Angermeier J, Hemmert W, Zirn S", "publisher": "Frontiers in Neuroscience 17:1257720", "date": "2024-01-04", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Offenburg University of Applied Sciences and Technical University of Munich; German Research Foundation, DFG)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10805375/", "summary": "Measured speech intelligibility in noise when a quieter direct sound and a louder, slightly delayed copy reach the ear together, as in an open-fit hearing aid.", "findings": [ "13 listeners with normal hearing took part and 11 completed both sessions; hearing loss was simulated by low-pass filtering the direct sound; delays of 1.75, 3.5 and 7 ms; speech from the front and noise from the side, over headphones.", "With the direct sound and delayed copy in one ear only, the speech reception threshold worsened significantly as the delay grew; the abstract reports a median change from -18.1 to -14.7 dB SNR.", "With the same delay in both ears there was no significant change.", "The direct sound did not prevent the loss. The authors attribute this to backward masking: with the delayed copy more than 20 dB louder, it dominated perception." ], "limitations": "Normal-hearing listeners with simulated loss; short delays only; headphone simulation without room reflections.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay" ] }, { "id": "surrey-2024-oval-access-statement", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/surrey-2024-oval-access-statement/", "title": "The Kia Oval: 2024 Access Guide", "authors": "Surrey County Cricket Club", "publisher": "Surrey County Cricket Club", "date": "2024-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Venue accessibility guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (club describing its own ground, with input from its Disabled Supporters Association; no external funding stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.kiaoval.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/SUR_240304_Surrey_Access_Statement_2024_v2.pdf", "summary": "The cricket ground's access guide names seating sections with induction loops.", "findings": [ "Page 10 lists loops in JM Finn Stand Blocks 6-16, seats 6-62 on the Terrace, and the Shelf of the Members' Pavilion.", "The guide includes a ground map marking hearing-loop locations." ], "limitations": "A venue description, not a test of field strength, speech understanding or performance with a full crowd. The cover gives the year 2024; no exact publication day is assigned. Describes provision at that edition, not a verified inventory for later seasons.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "assist2hear-2024-loop-specification", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/assist2hear-2024-loop-specification/", "title": "U.S. Architectural Specifications for Hearing Loop Systems", "authors": "Assist2Hear, Inc.", "publisher": "Assist2Hear, Inc. (copy hosted by the Center for Hearing Access)", "date": "2024-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Commercial specification template", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Manufacturer (commercial installer Assist2Hear's template credits Ampetronic's Generic Assistive Listening US Specification Hearing Loop Systems UP60007-11 US as its source; no separate funding is stated)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/Assist2Hear_US-General-Architectural-Specifications_2024.pdf", "summary": "A manufacturer-derived loop specification template includes site assessment, recorded acceptance tests and staff training, but retains older standard references.", "findings": [ "The page headers identify Assist2Hear, Inc. and the year 2024. Section 2 names IEC 60118-4:2006 for installed system performance and IEC 62489-1 for drivers, as well as the 2010 ADA Standards and 2012 International Building Code.", "Section 3 asks for magnetic noise and building-metal assessments early in the project, and for coverage exclusions to be submitted and indicated by signs.", "Section 9 calls for a testing method statement, the necessary test equipment, all results recorded and included with operation and maintenance manuals, at least 14 days' notice so a client representative can witness tests, demonstrations, operating instructions and as-installed drawings.", "Section 9 asks for early-installed loop wires to be checked for continuity and isolation from ground and metal structures, with the client able to witness the documented tests.", "Section 10 calls for training and written instructions on operation and functional tests, demonstration of the supplied test equipment, and a test and maintenance schedule." ], "limitations": "A commercial template derived from a manufacturer's specification, not independent evidence of outcomes or a universal contract. Its 2024 headers do not update its repeated references to IEC 60118-4:2006; IEC's 2014 edition replaced that edition and has a 2017 amendment. Equipment particulars and older code references should not be treated as current universal requirements. No completed installation or listener study is reported.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "procurement" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2024-wavecast-network-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2024-wavecast-network-guide/", "title": "WaveCAST Network Guide for Consultants and IT Professionals (TCH 040I)", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV", "date": "2024-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer network guide", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, maker of the WaveCAST Wi-Fi system, which also sells FM, infrared and Auracast assistive listening systems)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/TCH-040I-Wavecast-Network-Guide-1.pdf", "summary": "Williams AV's seven-page guide to the network its WaveCAST systems need to stream venue audio over Wi-Fi to phones and Wi-Fi receivers, in unicast or multicast mode.", "findings": [ "States that unicast mode supports up to 45 users and multicast mode up to 1,500, and that the maximum may be limited by network hardware, configuration or the DHCP server. Multichannel units such as WaveCAST EIGHT work only in multicast.", "Explains that unicast sends a separate copy of the stream to each listener (30 copies for 30 people) and is easier to set up, while multicast sends one copy per channel but needs network equipment that supports it; for multicast it recommends enterprise-grade routers and access points, saying consumer-grade routers do not work well.", "Gives about 30 kbps of Wi-Fi bandwidth per listener in either mode, plus 128 kb per device for background content when the app first connects.", "Says live audio streaming buffers only 2-3 packets ahead to avoid lip-sync delay, so a lost packet cannot be recovered and is heard as a drop-out.", "Lists network settings: voice-level QoS (DSCP 46, EF), IGMP snooping for multicast, the lowest possible DTIM setting (higher settings make the audio arrive in bursts), fixed access point channels, 5 GHz access points, a signal no weaker than -80 dBm, a separate VLAN or subnet, and guest-network isolation opened so phones can reach the server. It notes that encryption uses bandwidth and substantially reduces the number of successful connections.", "Warns that some phones leave a Wi-Fi network that has no internet access and switch to mobile data, losing the audio, and suggests airplane mode or turning off private addressing and random MAC addresses; its checklist says \"Networks ideally should have access to internet\".", "Notes that access points differ in the maximum number of client connections they allow, so the network must carry every user in the space with adequate bandwidth, and that if the enterprise network cannot be configured as required, \"an independent or segregated network may be an option\".", "Lists Apple iOS 9.1 or newer and Android 6.0 or newer as the supported receiving devices, with Blackberry and Windows not supported.", "Lists the ports to open (80, 3300, 3301, 3302 and 3303), quality of service set to voice or higher, and recommends a separate or isolated LAN, subnet or VLAN.", "Says channel hopping by access points can cause quick audio interruptions, that guest-network isolation is usual and must allow the server, and, for phones that drop a network without internet, suggests airplane mode or turning off mobile data; private-address settings are among optional adjustments for that case." ], "limitations": "A maker's network guide: the user limits are the maker's own, given without test conditions, and it gives no latency figures. No date is printed; the revision code is TCH 040I-1223, and the year comes from the PDF's creation date (15 January 2024). The maker's WaveCAST C product page linked this revision on 9 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "nsw-courts-2023-infrared-hearing", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nsw-courts-2023-infrared-hearing/", "title": "Support for people who are deaf or hard of hearing", "authors": "NSW Department of Communities and Justice", "publisher": "NSW Courts and Tribunals (courts.nsw.gov.au)", "date": "2023-12-03", "kind": "Court guidance page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (NSW Department of Communities and Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://courts.nsw.gov.au/help-and-support/services-for-people-with-disability/deaf-or-hard-of-hearing.html", "summary": "How courts in New South Wales provide infrared hearing systems for witnesses, parties, jurors, lawyers and others, and how to book one.", "findings": [ "Says the department uses permanent and portable infrared systems, which it describes as similar to hearing loops but ensuring that \"the information stays within the courtroom\".", "Lists witnesses, parties to the case, jurors, legal professionals, and relatives and friends among the people the system can assist.", "Asks people to contact the court two weeks before the hearing; a court without a system will order one. On the day, people should arrive 30 minutes early, confirm that the equipment is installed, check the volume and the best place to sit, and return the receiver at the end of the day.", "Offers a choice of earpiece, and a neckloop for hearing aids with a T switch." ], "limitations": "A service page without measurements; it does not say how many courtrooms have permanent systems or how windows are dealt with. Last updated 3 December 2023.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "iscve-cop", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iscve-cop/", "title": "Code of Practice for the Design and Operation of Assistive Listening Systems, Issue 1", "authors": "Audio Industries Committee on Assistive Listening Systems", "publisher": "Audio Industries Committee on Assistive Listening Systems; distributed by the Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers (UK)", "date": "2023-12-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Industry code of practice", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Trade body (Audio Industries Committee on Assistive Listening Systems, an audio industry committee; distributed by the Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers; the code names no funder)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://iscve.org.uk/standards/assistive-listening-guide-and-code-of-practice/", "summary": "A UK code of practice for assistive listening, with a list of measurements for Auracast systems.", "findings": [ "Clause 7.1 (page 17) says a minimum provision of venue receivers is still needed because listeners cannot be expected both to bring a working compatible hearing device and to know how to connect and use it.", "Clause 7.2.2(iv) (page 18) encourages witness testing with hearing-loss users and their own compatible devices where practical, with feedback documented. Clause 11.3 (page 37) says it is useful to obtain the views of a hearing aid user or hard-of-hearing listener because perceived intelligibility may differ from that of listeners with normal hearing or mild hearing loss.", "Clause 11.1 (page 36) calls for measurements at normal receiver heights and positions, considering the effects of full occupancy. Separate receivers should be tested in their intended positions, such as a pocket, belt clip or lanyard, for seated or standing use as appropriate. Clause 11.2 asks for coverage checks throughout the area and test positions marked on a room plan.", "Clause 10 (page 35) applies its handover guidance to any assistive listening system; the operation and maintenance manual includes equipment handbooks and system operating instructions alongside drawings, coverage maps, commissioning reports and commissioned settings.", "Clause 7.8 explains that faults can go unnoticed until a person with hearing loss uses the system. Its minimum routine check uses a listening device and a normal-use source, including speech at the normal microphone distance, with a tester able to judge the received level and quality. It recommends checks during events because the audience and its activity can alter RF and optical signal levels (page 28).", "Clause 7.8 recommends listening through a test device with a source representative of normal use, using a tester familiar with the correctly operating system. Checks should be at least as frequent as other audio-system checks, at intervals no longer than monthly, weekly for regular use, before each event and regularly during events (pages 28-29).", "Clause 7.8 asks for routine results in a system logbook, review of status-monitoring records, repeat performance tests appropriate to the technology, and fault or power-loss alerts where active monitoring is possible. It calls for checks after relevant building work, room reconfiguration, sound-system changes or operation by a third party, and benchmark testing when a new maintenance organisation takes over (pages 28-29).", "Clause 10 calls for a documented complaints process, communicated to customer-facing staff and advertised to hearing-device users, designed for prompt resolution (page 35). Clause 11.3 says hearing aid users and hard-of-hearing listeners may perceive intelligibility differently from listeners with normal hearing (page 37).", "Clause 11.3 checks the received speech first with a recording and then with a source representative of normal use, such as a talker at the system microphone speaking at a normal level, position and distance. Listening checks assess intelligibility, frequency balance, noise and distortion; problems call for objective tests to establish the cause (page 37).", "Clause 4.15 defines competence through relevant current training and experience, access to the necessary tools, equipment and information, and ability to perform the task. Informative Annex F lists ISCVE as an organisation for assessing competence.", "Clause 11 recommends that the installer or system specifier carry out performance tests after installation, including subjective and objective appraisals. Clause 11 allows some simple one-to-one systems to be assessed subjectively, depending on the technology and installation, with objective measurements if there is uncertainty. It requires a test report for venue management and does not require a separate external assessor for every installation (pages 35-36).", "Clause 10 calls for operator training at handover, an operation and maintenance manual with as-fitted drawings, coverage maps, commissioning reports and equipment settings, and an opportunity for the operator to hear a demonstration. At least one venue representative should be trained and equipped to perform routine tests, and customer-facing staff should receive refresher training.", "Annex A.3 (informative) lists the measurements that should normally be made on Auracast systems: frequency response, audio signal level, signal-to-noise ratio, coverage (signal strength and packet loss), latency, network performance, interference from other RF transmissions and a subjective assessment; STI is optional.", "Clause 11 asks for a \"certificate of compliance\" after testing, and for measurements at the normal listening height (1.2 m seated, 1.7 m standing for systems that transmit to hearing aids), taking account of a fully occupied space.", "Clause 9.8 recommends that the time difference between audible speech in the assistive listening signal and the acoustic sound, at similar sound levels, be 30 ms or less where possible, with 40 ms the limit of acceptability, counting the whole signal chain. With a video display of the talker, audio-to-picture timing should preferably be under 40 ms and no more than 50 ms.", "In large venues, the stream may need to be delayed, or split into zones with different delays, to align with the acoustic sound.", "The delay discussion in clause 9.8 (pp. 34-35) applies its 30 ms preference and 40 ms limit to audible speech signals of similar level. It notes that percussive music may require a shorter delay, and that a level difference of even a few dB can reduce the perceived discrepancy.", "Clause 11.3 (page 37) recommends checking audible delay or echo between received assistive sound and room sound using live speech, and checking timing against live mouth movements or video; an apparent timing discrepancy calls for objective latency measurement." ], "limitations": "A UK industry code, not an international standard. Written when Auracast was \"not yet fully defined\" and no systems were installed; Annex A is informative.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "signal-target", "commissioning-tests", "loop-verification", "wifi-latency", "installers-and-training", "venue-self-checks", "room-acoustics", "procurement" ] }, { "id": "bsi-2023-5839-8", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bsi-2023-5839-8/", "title": "BS 5839-8:2023: Fire detection and fire alarm systems for buildings — Part 8: Design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of voice alarm systems — Code of practice", "authors": "British Standards Institution, committee FSH/12/5", "publisher": "British Standards Institution", "date": "2023-10-31", "kind": "Standard (public preview and publisher overview)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (British Standards Institution)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail?pid=000000000030437520", "summary": "The public preview identifies new assistive-listening and hearing-loss warning recommendations in the UK voice-alarm code of practice.", "findings": [ "The publisher overview covers systems that automatically broadcast speech or warning tones in response to a fire detection and alarm system, including systems with manual live emergency announcement facilities. Systems dependent solely on manual intervention are outside its scope, although it can guide their design.", "The contents lists clause 12, Assistive listening systems, on printed page 18. The foreword, printed page III, identifies this as a new clause.", "The foreword reports new recommendations to warn people who are deaf or have hearing loss in areas where they might be alone, and to activate their warning devices for both automatic and manual emergency broadcasts.", "The foreword also reports a new recommendation against using audio inputs such as phones for emergency messages and control when they do not meet BS EN 54-16:2008. This concerns emergency inputs; it does not state a prohibition on listening through a phone.", "The contents separately lists circuit fault monitoring and integrity, priorities, power supplies and standby supplies, commissioning and routine testing. The foreword describes the document as recommendations and guidance, rather than a specification." ], "limitations": "Only the publisher overview and eight-page public preview were read; the preview ends at the foreword and does not include clause 12 or detailed standby-power recommendations. No claim about which listening technology clause 12 requires can be made from it. The BSI landing page lists publication as 13 October 2023, while the Knowledge page and preview foreword give 31 October 2023; the latter is used here. The expert-commentary preview contained only its cover and supplied no findings.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "listen-2023-ada-white-paper", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2023-ada-white-paper/", "title": "Understanding the Assistive Listening Americans with Disabilities Act", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2023-10-25", "kind": "Manufacturer white paper", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, which sells RF/FM, infrared, hearing loop, Wi-Fi and Auracast assistive listening products; owned since February 2023 by Allvida, which also owns the hearing-loop maker Ampetronic)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ADA-White-Paper-2023-10-25-vA1-WEB.pdf", "summary": "A maker's 21-page guide to the assistive listening requirements of the 2010 ADA Standards, with its list of advantages and disadvantages for RF, infrared, loop and Wi-Fi systems.", "findings": [ "Presents audio over Wi-Fi as one of \"four types of wireless assistive listening\", alongside RF, infrared and loops, while noting that the ADA's Advisory 706.1 names three (loop, infrared and FM) and that section 103, equivalent facilitation, allows other technologies that give substantially equivalent or greater accessibility.", "Lists for Wi-Fi: listeners can use their own smart device, it is user friendly and expandable, has unlimited channels and uses existing network infrastructure; against it, reliance on the Wi-Fi network, dependence on an app when a personal device is used, and possible extra latency when listeners use Bluetooth devices.", "Lists RF as budget-friendly with wide coverage (up to 3,000 ft) but not secure; infrared as secure and suited to confidential rooms but indoor only and complex to design; and loops as direct to telecoil hearing aids and discreet, but costly, intrusive to install and limited to the looped area.", "Explains that venues must provide receivers under Table 219.3, at least 25% of them (no fewer than two) hearing-aid compatible through neckloops, and that receivers are still needed where a loop serves every seat, though the neckloop minimum then no longer applies.", "States that about 80% of hearing aids dispensed in the United States have telecoils, citing a local HLAA chapter's web page.", "Lists \"Simple to set up and use\" among the advantages of RF systems (p. 11)." ], "limitations": "A maker’s guide to the law, which states that it is not legal advice; it contains no test data, and the advantages and disadvantages are the maker's own. The 80% telecoil figure rests on an undated chapter web page. The paper ends by pointing readers to the maker's own system recommendation tool. It is dated 25 October 2023 on its last page, although the file sits in a 2019 upload folder. Its version of Table 219.3 gives 20 plus 1 per 50 seats over 1,000 for 1,001-2,000 seats, where the ADA Standards give 35 plus 1 per 50.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-limits", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "bihima-2023-theatre-visits", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bihima-2023-theatre-visits/", "title": "Why is a visit to the theatre still such an anti-climax for hearing instrument users?", "authors": "BIHIMA", "publisher": "British Irish Hearing Instrument Manufacturers Association (BIHIMA)", "date": "2023-10-09", "kind": "Article (trade association news item built on one user's account)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (BIHIMA, the association of hearing instrument manufacturers in the UK and Ireland, calling for a minimum standard of service at theatres; the account is from one hearing device user, Susan Hamilton, working with BIHIMA on that project)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.bihima.com/why-is-a-visit-to-the-theatre-still-such-an-anti-climax-for-hearing-instrument-users/", "summary": "A hearing-instrument makers' association reports one hearing device user's theatre visits over three years and calls for an agreed minimum standard of assistive listening service at UK theatres.", "findings": [ "Reports that the user, who contacts venues ahead of time and visits to test the system where possible, had two problem-free visits out of 12 performances attended in three years, with problems ranging from out-of-date systems to ineffective technology and a night when the headphones provided picked up every backstage call along with the performance audio.", "Quotes the user: front-of-house staff were usually eager to help, but the systems \"seem to be managed or tested by people who don’t fully understand hearing loss\", nor know what to do when they fail.", "Quotes the user that a \"loop system (telecoil) using hard wired headphones\" usually worked and was easier for staff to test, but that headphones suit only people who do not use prescriptive hearing devices; using the hearing aids' T setting with \"a dongle around my neck\" to receive infrared or radio was intermittent, poor in quality and often dropped out. Once the house lights go down, controls are hard to see and help hard to ask for.", "Quotes the user that friends with different hearing devices, at the theatre together, each had a different outcome with the same system.", "BIHIMA's chair says the access information on theatre websites shows that for some venues support is a priority and for others \"almost a tick box exercise\", and calls for a collective agreement on a minimum level of service until new technologies such as Auracast can be tested." ], "limitations": "One person's account, gathered by an association whose members make hearing aids, with no record of which venues, systems or receivers were involved and no measurements. The sentence on headphones and the loop is ambiguous in the original. A rewritten version published by ENT & Audiology News on 23 October 2023 rewords the user's quotation so that it reads as a statement about loop systems; this record follows BIHIMA's own text.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "starkey-2023-posture-patent", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/starkey-2023-posture-patent/", "title": "Ear-worn electronic device configured to compensate for hunched or stooped posture (US 11,778,392 B2)", "authors": "Burwinkel JR, Seitz-Paquette K", "publisher": "United States Patent and Trademark Office", "date": "2023-10-03", "kind": "Manufacturer patent (granted US patent)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Starkey Laboratories, a hearing aid maker, is the assignee)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/11778392", "summary": "A hearing aid maker's patent on adjusting hearing aids for wearers with a stooped posture, whose background states how much a tilted telecoil loses from a loop's field.", "findings": [ "States that a telecoil's sensitivity to a magnetic field from the horizontal plane depends on its orientation: 45 degrees from its best position gives about 3 dB less input, 60 degrees about 6 dB less, and 90 degrees zero or near-zero input.", "Notes that telecoils are often mounted at an angle of 15 to 45 degrees inside the hearing aid, so in an extreme case a wearer with a stooped posture (kyphosis) who tilts the head 30 degrees could have the telecoil 75 degrees from its best position.", "Says hearing aid microphones and telecoils are oriented by design for typical posture, and that poor fittings can leave a hearing aid resting on the ear at a suboptimal angle." ], "limitations": "Background text in a patent, not a study: the angle figures follow from geometry and are not tied to measurements or to listeners, and the patent gives no data on how many users tilt their heads or stoop. The applicant has a commercial interest in the remedy it claims. Filed on 27 October 2020 (priority 14 November 2019) and granted on 3 October 2023; the patent text was read through Google Patents and the link given is the USPTO's copy.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-limits", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "gasteiger-2023-bison", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/gasteiger-2023-bison/", "title": "BISON: Attacking Bluetooth’s Broadcast Isochronous Streams", "authors": "Gasteiger T, Boano CA, Römer K", "publisher": "EWSN 2023; Association for Computing Machinery", "date": "2023-09-25", "kind": "Peer-reviewed conference paper", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Graz University of Technology; funding not stated in the paper)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.carloalbertoboano.com/documents/gasteiger23bison.pdf", "summary": "Demonstrates takeover of a Bluetooth broadcast packet stream on development boards and explains why a shared broadcast code cannot distinguish a legitimate sender from another code holder; audio-data exploitation remains future work.", "findings": [ "Sections 2 and 3 distinguish open broadcasts from encrypted broadcasts whose receivers share a Broadcast_Code. Public synchronization information exposes the timing and radio channels even when the audio is encrypted.", "Sections 3 and 4 explain that an attacker who can overpower the legitimate signal at a receiver can replace unencrypted packets; for encrypted content the attacker needs the shared Broadcast_Code. The described takeover diverts a receiver to a forged stream while the original transmitter continues broadcasting.", "Section 5 demonstrates the attack with two Nordic nRF5340 audio development kits acting as sender and receiver and one nRF52840 development kit acting as attacker, running modified Zephyr software.", "Section 8, Conclusions and Future Work (proceedings page 261; PDF page 6), leaves extending the attack to exploit audio data and demonstrating its impact on finished LE Audio devices to future work. Section 5 establishes redirection and reception of forged packets; it does not report a listener hearing a substituted announcement.", "Section 6 discusses stronger code exchange, digital signatures and monitoring received signal strength. It cautions that signatures add processing demands and that signal-strength changes are hard to interpret in mobile settings. These are proposed countermeasures, not established venue protections." ], "limitations": "Three development boards, no listener study, installed venue trial, attack prevalence estimate or product-wide success rate. The encrypted-stream analysis assumes access to the code; the demonstration does not establish that encryption can be bypassed without it. The paper's broad description of control information as plaintext should be read alongside Core 6.0 Volume 6 Part E, which protects non-empty encrypted control payloads too. Publication date and peer-review status checked against the university's publication record; DOI 10.5555/3639940.3639973.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "chha-2023-yvr-counter-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/chha-2023-yvr-counter-loops/", "title": "Get In the Hearing Loop! Our Impact: Vancouver International Airport", "authors": "CHHA National (Canadian Hard of Hearing Association)", "publisher": "Canadian Hard of Hearing Association", "date": "2023-08-16", "kind": "Advocacy program page (an installer's field check)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Canadian Hard of Hearing Association, in its Get in the Hearing Loop series; the check described was made by Advanced Listening Systems, the company that installed and later restored the loops)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://oldsite.chha.ca/?p=7490", "summary": "A hard-of-hearing association's account of counter loops at Vancouver International Airport's information kiosks: installed in 2015, found in 2022 to be largely out of order, and restored the following year with staff training.", "findings": [ "In 2015, Advanced Listening Systems installed one-to-one, above-counter hearing loops at 13 information kiosks throughout Vancouver International Airport.", "When the same company was asked in 2022 to evaluate their operational status, \"many of these systems were not in working order or were physically broken\".", "The following year the loops were restored and redeployed, and the staff of the information desks were taught how the loops work and how the public will use them.", "Quotes the airport's senior accessibility and inclusion specialist saying the airport is proud to have hearing loop systems at all information counters." ], "limitations": "A short promotional account: it gives no count of how many of the 13 loops failed, no test method or measurements, and no information on how often the loops were used. The check was made by the installer that then did the repair work, and the page closes with the installer's description and web address.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "icc-2023-ibc-2024-assistive-listening", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/icc-2023-ibc-2024-assistive-listening/", "title": "2024 International Building Code, Chapter 11 Accessibility: 1109.2.7 Assistive listening systems and 1112.4 Other signs", "authors": "International Code Council", "publisher": "International Code Council (ICC Digital Codes)", "date": "2023-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Model building code", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Standards body (International Code Council)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IBC2024P1/chapter-11-accessibility", "summary": "The US model building code's assistive listening rules, which most state and local building codes adopt with amendments.", "findings": [ "Requires an assistive listening system in each building, room or space used for assembly where audible communications are integral to its use; outside courtrooms, none is required where there is no audio amplification system.", "Table 1109.2.7.1 sets receivers by seating capacity (2 for 50 seats or fewer, rising to 55 plus 1 per 100 seats over 2,000), with 2 hearing-aid-compatible receivers up to 200 seats and 1 in 4 above that. Exceptions allow pooling receivers across rooms under one management, and drop the hearing-aid-compatible minimum where an induction loop serves all seats.", "Section 1109.2.7.2 says that where stadiums and arenas have ticket windows, at least one window at each location must have an assistive listening system. Section 1109.2.7.3 separately requires stadiums, arenas and grandstands with 15,000 or more fixed seats that make audible public announcements to caption them.", "Each assembly area must have a sign, with the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss, saying that assistive listening is available; signs at each ticket office or window can replace signs at each assembly area.", "Refers to ICC A117.1 (its list of referenced standards gives the 2017 edition) and does not mention Bluetooth or Auracast.", "Section 1109.2.7.1, exception 1, permits pooling only within one building under one management, with every receiver usable with every system. The asterisks in Table 1109.2.7.1 mean that fractions of the seat increments and the one-per-four receiver share are rounded upward.", "Table 1109.2.7.1 requires two receivers up to 50 seats; two plus one per 25 seats over 50 for both the 51-200 and 201-500 bands; 20 plus one per 33 over 500 for 501-1,000 seats; 35 plus one per 50 over 1,000 for 1,001-2,000 seats; and 55 plus one per 100 over 2,000. Each increment includes fractions.", "Section 1112.4 item 1 requires the availability sign to meet ICC A117.1 visual-character requirements as well as carry the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss." ], "limitations": "A model code: it applies only where a state or local government adopts it, often with amendments. The date is the version label shown on ICC's site (August 2023). This audit used the archived excerpts of sections 1109.2.7 through 1109.2.7.3 and 1112.4; the saved HTML is a page shell, not the full chapter. No paid commentary was read.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "loan-receivers", "large-venues", "privacy", "service-counters", "signage-and-awareness", "courts-and-chambers", "theatres-and-cinemas", "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "ndc-managing-listening-systems", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ndc-managing-listening-systems/", "title": "Managing Assistive Listening Systems", "authors": "National Deaf Center on Postsecondary Outcomes", "publisher": "National Deaf Center on Postsecondary Outcomes, University of Texas at Austin", "date": "2023-07-17", "kind": "Campus operational guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (National Deaf Center website developed under US Department of Education OSEP grant H326D210002; the page states that its contents need not represent Department policy)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://nationaldeafcenter.org/resources/access-accommodations/assistive-listening-systems/managing-assistive-listening-systems/", "summary": "Campus guidance on listener consultation, checking equipment before lectures, microphone practice and maintenance arrangements.", "findings": [ "Asks staff to discuss students’ prior experience and listening environments, offer a demonstration when needed, and establish loan arrangements including lost or damaged equipment and returns.", "Advises checking the transmitter and making a quick sound check with the student before a lecture to confirm transmitter and receiver operation.", "Advises repeating brief audience questions or passing the microphone for longer contributions, because classmates speaking away from the microphone cannot be heard through the listening system.", "For infrared, recommends discussing suitable seating with the student and checking for obstructions such as a podium or audiovisual equipment.", "Suggests considering warranties that include routine maintenance and cleaning, which can be scheduled over summer." ], "limitations": "Guidance without a measured trial. Includes personal equipment and individual classroom accommodations; only the shared microphone/transmission path and institution-run loan and maintenance arrangements are used here. Last modified 17 July 2023, originally published 27 June 2023. No warranty price, service specification or comparative reliability data is given.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2023-als-coexistence", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2023-als-coexistence/", "title": "Why Auracast broadcast audio needs to coexist with current assistive listening technologies", "authors": "Sabin C, Drullman R, Thomas A", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (blog)", "date": "2023-06-22", "kind": "Blog article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark. Written by Chuck Sabin of the SIG's market development staff, Rob Drullman, an independent researcher who is secretary of the technical committee of EHIMA, the European hearing instrument manufacturers' association, and Andrew Thomas of the loop and assistive listening maker Contacta Systems, chairman of the International Hearing Loop Manufacturers Association)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/blog/why-auracast-broadcast-audio-needs-to-coexist-with-current-assistive-listening-technologies/", "summary": "A SIG blog post, co-written with hearing-industry representatives, arguing that Auracast should be added alongside loops, FM and infrared rather than replace them for years to come.", "findings": [ "Describes venue FM as a transmitter sending to receivers worn by listeners, heard through headphones or a neckloop with a telecoil, in regional licence-free frequency bands.", "Quotes the International Federation of Hard of Hearing People as foreseeing that \"FM, IR, and hearing loop systems\" will function \"for the foreseeable future\" alongside Auracast systems, and calling for all assistive listening systems, hearing aids and implants to be Auracast plus telecoil compatible.", "States that the overlap before Auracast reaches full market potential \"could take years, maybe even a decade\", and that until it is more available to users than other systems it should be offered as an additional option.", "Reports that some industry experts recommend that makers add Auracast while keeping telecoils and loop installations, and warns that dropping telecoils or loop support at once could isolate current telecoil users.", "Says an international installation standard for Auracast, similar to IEC 60118-4 for loops, will be essential.", "Written by Andrew Thomas, market development director of the loop maker Contacta Systems; says Auracast's availability \"exceeds the availability of other systems (e.g., telecoils)\"." ], "limitations": "Marketing material from the trademark owner, co-written with representatives of hearing-aid and loop makers; it reports no data on use, cost or performance, and its timescale is an estimate.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands", "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2023-lc3-characterization", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2023-lc3-characterization/", "title": "Performance characterization of the Low Complexity Communication Codec", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Generic Audio Working Group", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2023-06-13", "kind": "White paper", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark; laboratory tests by SenseLab of FORCE Technology and by Fraunhofer IIS)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/LC3Characterization_WP.pdf", "summary": "Summarises the listening tests and measurements made while the LC3 codec used by Auracast was standardised.", "findings": [ "In the hearing-aid speech test at 16 kHz, LC3 at 32 kbps was rated the same as SBC at 66.4 kbps and significantly better than G.722 at 64 kbps (online test, 119 listeners).", "In the hearing-aid music test at 24 kHz, LC3 at 48 kbps was rated significantly better than G.722 at 96 kbps and SBC at 96.4 kbps (online test with 115 listeners, and a laboratory test with 20 listeners).", "The hearing-aid-use-case listening tests in section 2.4 used error-free transmission. Section 1.3.5 allows implementers to modify or replace the example packet-loss concealment algorithm; section 2.1.2 separately reports a Fraunhofer test with 25 listeners comparing concealment implementations at loss rates from 0% to 12%. The section 2 introduction warns that transmission errors can affect listening quality.", "Section 3.2 (pages 38-39) says LC3 uses a long-term post-filter at lower bitrates. For level and distortion measurements, this filter can raise a full-scale sine tone by up to 0.5 dB; a 6,427 Hz test tone usually keeps the gain difference below 0.03 dB at 16, 24, 32 and 48 kHz, and for normal speech and music the difference is typically under 0.1 dB.", "Section 1.3.4 explains that LC3 codes channels separately and builds stereo or multichannel streams by aggregating those channels. Codec payload bitrate therefore scales with channel count.", "Section 2.4.4 reports a second 16 kHz test with 20 expert listeners: 10 ms LC3 at 32 kbps rated significantly above 7.5 ms LC3 at that rate; 7.5 ms LC3 did not differ significantly from G.722 at 64 kbps.", "Tables 2.6-2.8 and sections 2.4.3-2.4.6 identify both speech and music in the 16 kHz and 24 kHz material. The online LC3 conditions used 10 ms frames; the laboratory conditions included both 7.5 ms and 10 ms frames." ], "limitations": "Compares codecs, not complete broadcast systems. The paper does not report the listeners' hearing; the online tests were open to Bluetooth SIG members.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "audio-level", "commissioning-tests", "measuring-tools", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-computex-experience", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-computex-experience/", "title": "The Bluetooth SIG Hosts The Auracast Experience at Computex Taipei", "authors": "Jason Marcel", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2023-06-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Article (trade-body demonstration account)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG promotional event with member companies; the SIG is funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/blog/the-bluetooth-sig-hosts-the-auracast-experience-at-computex-taipei/", "summary": "An organiser account of choosing languages and television broadcasts in staged settings.", "findings": [ "The event took place on 31 May 2023. Participants received earbuds and a phone with an Auracast app for simulated public environments.", "A mock lecture offered language selection, and a simulated sports bar offered a choice between different television broadcasts.", "The Unmuting Silent TVs at an Airport Sports Bar section describes switching between television audio broadcasts as seamless and without delay. This is the organiser’s description; no timing measurements accompany it." ], "limitations": "Promotional demonstration, not an operating-venue study. No participant count, hearing-loss breakdown, device list, selection-error rate or measured switching time. The language demonstration is used only as evidence about the shared selection path; conference interpretation is outside scope.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "vlrc-2023-inclusive-juries", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/vlrc-2023-inclusive-juries/", "title": "Inclusive Juries: Access for People Who Are Deaf, Hard of Hearing, Blind or Have Low Vision (report), chapter 13: Adjustments to enable jury service", "authors": "Victorian Law Reform Commission", "publisher": "Victorian Law Reform Commission", "date": "2023-05-16", "kind": "Regulatory report (law reform commission report tabled in Parliament)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Victorian Law Reform Commission, a statutory law reform body; the report was tabled in the Victorian Parliament)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au/publication/inclusive-juries-report/13-adjustments-to-enable-jury-service/", "summary": "A Victorian law reform report on enabling people who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind or have low vision to serve on juries; its chapter 13 covers hearing loops, captioning, courtroom layout and jurors' own technology.", "findings": [ "Reports that hearing loops are used in Australian courts, including the County and Supreme Courts of Victoria, though not every Victorian courtroom has one; consultees told the Commission that the Supreme Court has loops in every courtroom and the County Court does not.", "Quotes the Victorian Disability Access Bench Book: where loops are not in place, \"judicial officers should consider whether a different courtroom is required\".", "States that not all hearing aids are compatible with all hearing loops, and suggests testing this when a prospective juror visits the court before the summons date.", "Notes that real-time captioning (CART) is used in the Federal Court of Australia and the Family Court of Australia and can be combined with an audio component such as a hearing loop.", "Reports County Court consultees' concern about jurors bringing their own technology, since \"Phones are removed from jurors when they deliberate\", and a New York jury commissioner's account that in Monroe County only court-provided technology may be used and jurors may not use phones in the deliberation room.", "Concludes that, in general, Juries Victoria and the courts should provide the technology jurors need, and quotes a submission that jurors need time before the trial to set it up." ], "limitations": "A law reform report built on consultations and submissions, not measurements: it gives no figures on how loops perform or are used in Victorian courts, and it does not consider Auracast. Its statement that not all hearing aids work with all loops rests on a charity's web page and a jury commissioner's comment.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "kaufmann-2023", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/kaufmann-2023/", "title": "Requirements for mass adoption of assistive listening technology by the general public", "authors": "Kaufmann TB, Foroogozar M, Liss J, Berisha V", "publisher": "ICASSP 2023 Workshops, IEEE (arXiv 2303.02523)", "date": "2023-05-03", "kind": "Conference paper", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Arizona State University)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.02523", "summary": "A position paper that puts forward five likely barriers to wider use of assistive listening, including the delay between the assistive signal and loudspeaker sound, and proposes fixes.", "findings": [ "Explains the alignment delay: the assistive signal reaches the listener almost instantly, while loudspeaker sound travels at about 343 m/s (in dry air at 20 °C), so a listener about 60 m from the stage hears it about 180 ms after it leaves the loudspeakers; a listener who hears both signals, one delayed against the other, perceives a distorted signal.", "Names the ways a listener can hear the room as well as the assistive signal: open-fit hearing aids, a hearing aid or implant program that mixes the assistive signal with the device's own microphones, and the transparency mode of headphones and earphones, which it expects Auracast to use; it assumes that more than half of hearing aids are dispensed with an open fit.", "Describes a second copy of the signal as tending to be heard as coloration below about 5 ms, as reverberation from 5 to 30 ms and as an echo above 30 ms, citing earlier work.", "States that most listeners find echoes intolerable at about 30 ms and that people with hearing loss tend to tolerate slightly longer delays.", "Recommends delay compensation wherever any seat is more than about 10 m from the stage, by several broadcasts each carrying its own delay, a variable delay set in the receiver, or an ultrasound carrier.", "Notes that the LE Audio specification does not require receivers to support a Presentation Delay above 40 ms, so many receivers may not be able to buffer enough to line up with the room sound in large venues.", "Proposes amending the specification so receivers support a Presentation Delay of at least 500 ms and can accept a listener-specific alignment delay.", "Cites Goehring et al. as the study behind the tolerance of about 30 ms and the longer tolerance with hearing loss (section 2.4)." ], "limitations": "No new listening data. The delay-tolerance studies it cites concern a hearing aid's own processing delay, where the device sound arrives after the direct sound, not an assistive signal that arrives before the room sound.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "large-venues", "wifi-latency", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "healthwatch-bucks-2023-gp-hearing-loss", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/healthwatch-bucks-2023-gp-hearing-loss/", "title": "GP surgery care when you're Deaf, deaf or hard of hearing", "authors": "Healthwatch Bucks", "publisher": "Healthwatch Bucks (reports library of Healthwatch England)", "date": "2023-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Paper (local survey report: online survey and focus groups)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Government (Healthwatch Bucks, Buckinghamshire's statutory health and social care watchdog)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://nds.healthwatch.co.uk/sites/default/files/reports_library/20230712_Bucks_Accessing%20GP%20Care%20with%20Hearing%20Loss%20Report.pdf", "summary": "A local watchdog's survey and focus groups with 90 Deaf, deaf and hard of hearing people about booking and attending GP appointments in Buckinghamshire.", "findings": [ "Appendix 1, Data analysis, warns that people could submit the survey more than once, so response counts can exceed the number of distinct individuals. Its thematic counts can also overlap and should not be summed across questions.", "An online survey (7 February to 30 April 2023), publicised through social media and community and service providers' newsletters, and three focus groups reached 90 people registered with Buckinghamshire GP surgeries; their median age was 68, and 34% said they were Deaf or had profound hearing loss.", "Asked the main way they communicated with people inside the surgery, 56 of 85 respondents named speech, 11 lip reading, 8 taking a friend, relative or support worker, 3 an in-person BSL interpreter and 1 a hearing loop.", "Reports that people whose hearing aids can use a loop preferred a loop to depending on lip reading alone, but that not every surgery has one and, where there is one, not all staff know where the equipment is kept or how to use it. One respondent said the practice's Friends had funded hearing loops that staff did not use \"other than badly at the reception desk\".", "Several people wanted to know why hearing loops or apps such as Sign Live could not be offered routinely, and some who relied on family, friends or social workers to help them communicate felt this did not let them keep parts of their medical history private.", "Its proposed charter for GP practices includes offering a speech-to-text app or hearing loop, and collecting patients from the waiting room or giving a non-audio prompt when staff are ready to see them." ], "limitations": "The report does not state project funding; the Government category describes the watchdog, not an identified grant for this survey. A self-selected local sample (91% White British, 68% women) reached through social media, newsletters and hearing-loss groups; the loop findings are respondents' accounts, not checks of equipment, and the question on communication counted only the main method. The cover dates the report May 2023; Healthwatch England's library lists it on 12 July 2023.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings", "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2023-regulatory-aspects", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2023-regulatory-aspects/", "title": "Bluetooth Low Energy regulatory aspects document, version 1.01", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Regulatory Expert Group", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2023-03-23", "kind": "Informational publication", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/bluetooth-le-regulatory-aspects-document.pdf", "summary": "The SIG's guide to how 2.4 GHz radio rules in the EU and UK, the US and Canada, China, Japan and Korea apply to Bluetooth LE products, including LE Audio broadcasts.", "findings": [ "Under the European standard EN 300 328, a device transmitting at +10 dBm EIRP or more must either meet the standard's adaptivity requirements (detect-and-avoid or listen-before-talk) or accept medium-utilisation limits with enforced gaps between transmissions.", "The channel selection in the Bluetooth Core Specification does not by itself meet those adaptivity requirements, so meeting them is left to each product. For wideband (non-hopping) equipment, the document names staying below +10 dBm as the simplest way to avoid the limits.", "Equipment assessed as wideband is also limited by power density to slightly above +10 dBm EIRP on the LE 1M radio mode and slightly above +13 dBm on LE 2M.", "When checking duty-cycle limits, the airtime of all broadcast streams and of the advertising that announces them must be added together." ], "limitations": "Informational; it states that it does not replace the regulations, which have changed since 2023. It explains the rules and does not report what any product does.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "real-range" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2023-72mhz-fm-chart", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2023-72mhz-fm-chart/", "title": "Technical Bulletin: 72 MHz FM Chart (TCH 010G)", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV", "date": "2023-02-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer technical bulletin", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, formerly Williams Sound, which sells the FM systems charted here as well as infrared, hearing loop, Wi-Fi and Auracast assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/TCH-010G-FM-Chart-2020.pdf", "summary": "A one-page chart of the maker's 17 channels at 72-76 MHz, marking the eight it says can run at the same time.", "findings": [ "Lists 17 channels between 72.1 and 75.9 MHz for all the maker's 72 MHz FM products, each with a frequency, a letter and a channel number.", "States that the channels have been \"frequency-allocated for best possible simultaneous group performance without interference\" and that eight groups can operate at the same time using one channel each from its 8-channel set.", "Its 8-channel set is 72.1, 72.3, 72.6, 72.8, 74.7, 75.4, 75.7 and 75.9 MHz, so some channels in the set are 200 kHz apart." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's chart without measurements or conditions (distance, power, receiver type) for its claim that eight channels run together. The date comes from the bulletin code (TCH 010G-0223) and the file's creation date of 3 February 2023; the page carries a 2022 copyright and the file name says 2020.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-core-54-history", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-core-54-history/", "title": "Bluetooth Core Specification 5.4: Version History and Acknowledgments; Core Specification Change History", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2023-01-31", "kind": "Specification history", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/Files/Specification/HTML/Core-54/out/en/consolidated-table-of-contents---compliance-requirements/version-history-and-acknowledgments.html", "summary": "The Core specification records the adoption date of version 5.2 and its addition of LE Isochronous Channels.", "findings": [ "Volume 0 Part C records Board adoption of Core 5.2 on 31 December 2019 and of Core 5.4 on 31 January 2023.", "Volume 1 Part C, section 11.1, lists LE Isochronous Channels, Enhanced Attribute Protocol and LE Power Control as the major additions in Core 5.2." ], "limitations": "Read the two public history sections, not the entire Core specification. The date identifies the 5.4 document containing the retrospective history. Core adoption alone does not establish Auracast support or a venue installation rule. The companion change-history page is archived with this record.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "wim-accessibility-plus-grant", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/wim-accessibility-plus-grant/", "title": "Accessibility Plus Grant for people with special needs", "authors": "Military Institute of Medicine – National Research Institute", "publisher": "Military Institute of Medicine – National Research Institute, Poland", "date": "2023-01-26", "kind": "Article (public institution grant project report)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Government (Polish military medical institute; project financed by European Funds and the Ministry of Health)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://wim.mil.pl/en/patient/availability/Accessibility-Plus-grant-for-people-with-special-needs/", "summary": "A Polish hospital reports purchasing 29 portable induction loops within a 2021-22 Accessibility Plus project financed by European Funds and the Ministry of Health.", "findings": [ "The institute states that the project ran from May 2021 to the end of October 2022 and addressed architectural, digital, communication and organisational accessibility.", "Its purchased-equipment list includes 29 portable induction loops for communication with patients who have hearing impairments.", "The project also included physical alterations, website changes and staff communication training. The institute identifies European Funds and the Ministry of Health as its funders." ], "limitations": "An older beneficiary report, not a Europe-wide grant call or evidence of an open 2026 programme. The page supplies no loop costs, model names, field measurements or user study. Publication date comes from HTML metadata (26 January 2023); metadata also records an update on 25 August 2026. The English page was read; its linked final audit was not read.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-security-best-practices", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-security-best-practices/", "title": "Bluetooth Security and Privacy Best Practices Guide, revision R04", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG Security and Privacy Improvement Program", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2023-01-24", "kind": "Security design guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/download/bluetooth-security-and-privacy-best-practices-guide/", "summary": "Advises implementers to protect broadcast-code exchange and use long, random codes, while discussing usability and the limits of short codes.", "findings": [ "Section 4.22, page 54, recommends LE Security Mode 3 Level 3 for private broadcast content. It explains that authenticating code exchange helps prevent an intermediary obtaining the code, and says the authentication method was not specified by Core 5.3.", "Section 4.23, page 55, warns that someone with a recorded encrypted broadcast can try possible codes offline without a limit on attempts. It recommends a long random code where content must be protected from listening or manipulation, and occasional changes when a suitable exchange mechanism exists.", "Long codes are harder to remember and enter; sharing them through another encrypted channel can reduce that burden. Even a short code can protect against packet modification during the time an attacker is still searching for it.", "For publicly accessible media such as airport announcements, the guide allows an easy-to-remember code and recommends changing it periodically to hinder false data injection. The guide does not establish protection against an attacker who is legitimately given that code." ], "limitations": "Implementation guidance, expressly intended to clarify rather than specify; revision date taken from the cover. Sections 4.22 and 4.23 were read in full. No venue measurements, listener sample or evaluation against malicious code holders. Its advice about public codes needs the shared-code threat model in BISON and BACON alongside it.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "healthwatch-hackney-2023-pharmacy-accessibility", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/healthwatch-hackney-2023-pharmacy-accessibility/", "title": "Accessibility Audit of Hackney's Community Pharmacies", "authors": "Healthwatch Hackney", "publisher": "Healthwatch Hackney (reports library of Healthwatch England)", "date": "2023-01-17", "kind": "Local audit report (field visits by lay representatives)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Government (Healthwatch Hackney, the borough's statutory health and social care watchdog; the visits were made by four of its authorised representatives, and the report thanks the City and Hackney Local Pharmaceutical Committee for its support)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://nds.healthwatch.co.uk/sites/default/files/reports_library/20230117_Hackney_Pharmacies-Accessibility-Audit-report-April-2022.pdf", "summary": "A local watchdog's visits to 48 community pharmacies in an inner London borough in April 2022, recording hearing loops, counters, consultation rooms and signs, with each pharmacy's response.", "findings": [ "The nine-loop total is the report's summary on PDF page 11. Its detailed findings include sign-only observations: the Boots E8 2NS entry describes a loop sticker that staff did not recognise. Such entries do not independently establish working equipment, so the summary should not be converted into nine successful listening checks.", "Four authorised representatives visited the 48 Hackney pharmacies signed up to the NHS Community Pharmacist Consultation Service over a month in April 2022, using a checklist; pharmacies were told that visits were planned but not the dates and times.", "Nine pharmacies had an induction loop, but staff at two of them were either unaware of it or did not know how to use it; 39 were recommended to install a loop and to train staff once it was in place.", "At one pharmacy a sticker showed that a loop was available but the staff did not know how to use it; the pharmacy later replied that the loop was operational and staff had been retrained. Another replied that it had no funds for a loop and asked whether council or other funding was available.", "All 48 had a room for private consultations, but some rooms were too small for a comfortable conversation, inaccessible, or used for storage and office space, and staff at those pharmacies said a private conversation would have to take place outside the pharmacy. The authors note that chairs placed near the counter or the consultation room could create issues with confidentiality.", "Describes the requirement, under the NHS Healthy Living Pharmacy criteria from 1 January 2021, that almost all pharmacies have a consultation room where patient and pharmacist can sit and talk at normal speaking volumes without being overheard, with telephone or live audio and video arrangements where premises are too small for one." ], "limitations": "A record of what was present, made by lay visitors with a checklist: the report does not say that loops were tested by listening or measured, or how staff knowledge was checked. One London borough. 24 of the 46 pharmacies given recommendations replied. The cover dates the audit April 2022; the report includes replies up to November 2022 and is listed in Healthwatch England's library on 17 January 2023.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "listen-2023-lutcher-case-study", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2023-lutcher-case-study/", "title": "Lutcher Theater Installs Wi-Fi and RF Assistive Listening (case study)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2023-01-13", "kind": "Manufacturer case study", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, which supplied the RF and Wi-Fi systems described and also sells infrared systems)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/RF_LE-Lutcher-Theater-Case-Study-WEB.pdf", "summary": "A maker's case study of a 1,500-seat theatre in Texas that replaced an infrared system more than 30 years old with the maker's RF receivers and Wi-Fi streaming to phones.", "findings": [ "Says the theatre's infrared system had served patrons for more than 30 years and still worked, but patrons were increasingly experiencing interference from large LED screens in the theatre.", "Reports that, on a reseller's recommendation, the theatre installed a 72 MHz RF system with the maker's receivers and neckloops alongside Wi-Fi streaming to patrons' phones, so that patrons can choose.", "States that the theatre checks out 15-20 assistive listening devices per performance on average, and has had 50-60 requests on some nights.", "Quotes the technical director praising the new receivers' sound and their charging cradles, which switch the receivers on when they are lifted out, and notes that Wi-Fi users need not check out or return a device." ], "limitations": "A maker's marketing case study of its own products. The LED screen interference is reported without measurements or details of the old system (its maker or carrier frequency), and the loan figures are not dated or tied to either system. Date from the document code (20230113); the PDF was created on 23 February 2023.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "infrared-limits", "lifetime-costs", "theatres-and-cinemas", "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "heuij-2023-academic-success", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/heuij-2023-academic-success/", "title": "Academic Success of Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing in Mainstream Higher Education", "authors": "Kirsten Maria Louise van den Heuij; Chapter 7 with Karin Neijenhuis and Martine Coene", "publisher": "LOT / Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, doctoral thesis", "date": "2023-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Peer-reviewed qualitative study (reproduced in a doctoral thesis)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (academic research at Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; no named study funder in the chapter; thesis acknowledgements thank institutional management for facilitating the research)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.lotpublications.nl/Documents/645_fulltext.pdf", "summary": "Interviews with 32 Dutch-speaking deaf and hard-of-hearing participants describe helpful lecture-room loops alongside acoustic, microphone and support-service barriers.", "findings": [ "In Chapter 7, the Lecturers subsection (printed page 164) and discussion (page 177) report that students felt lecturers needed repeated reminders about their hearing loss and support needs, despite generally willing and understanding attitudes.", "Chapter 7, printed pages 149–183, reproduces a 2022 study by van den Heuij, Neijenhuis and Coene in Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 27(4):385–398, DOI 10.1093/deafed/enac020.", "The purposive volunteer sample comprised 32 participants aged 19–32: 31 enrolled students across 18 institutions (17 in the Netherlands and one in Belgium), and one recent graduate. Twenty-eight used hearing aids and/or cochlear implants; four did not use hearing aids. All were fluent in spoken Dutch and none used sign language as their everyday language.", "Students described lecture microphones as beneficial but sometimes faulty or unused. Loops were helpful when installed, working and compatible with the student’s hearing device; unobtrusive adjustments such as loops were valued.", "Participants reported variable room acoustics, difficulty following group discussion, fatigue and choosing seats for audibility and sight of the lecturer, sometimes at the cost of sitting with friends.", "Student support staff were often described as helpful and understanding, but some students reported limited staff knowledge, delayed contact and burdensome adjustment procedures. The authors propose involving students and support staff in developing a menu of possible adjustments.", "The chapter also describes personal FM microphone use, with both listening benefits and inconvenience or reluctance to hand over and retrieve equipment; these are personal-system experiences and do not establish preference between venue FM and loops." ], "limitations": "Qualitative self-reports from a small, self-selected spoken-Dutch group, including one recent graduate; no prevalence estimate or controlled comparison between venue systems. The thesis copyright provides the 2023 date, with year precision; the underlying article is from 2022. Read the chapter and relevant front matter and acknowledgements, not every study in the thesis. No dedicated funder statement was found for this chapter.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lecture-halls" ] }, { "id": "jcc-2023-trial-court-facilities-standards", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/jcc-2023-trial-court-facilities-standards/", "title": "California Trial Court Facilities Standards, 2023 edition (chapter 18, Audiovisual Systems)", "authors": "Judicial Council of California, Facilities Services", "publisher": "Judicial Council of California (courts.ca.gov)", "date": "2023-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Court design standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (Judicial Council of California, the policy-making body of the California courts)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/2023_ctcfs_24_09_19.pdf", "summary": "California's design standards for new and renovated trial courthouses, including assistive listening, interpretation channels, microphones and speech privacy in courtrooms, jury rooms and conference rooms.", "findings": [ "Requires an assistive listening system that will \"provide secure transmission\" of speech and programme audio, with the system types and receiver numbers checked against sections 11B-219 and 11B-706 of the California Building Code.", "For typical courtrooms, specifies a two-channel infrared assistive listening system, channel 1 for assistive listening and channel 2 for language translation, with more channels at the court's discretion. The language access system works with these alternate channels, and a wireless microphone can be routed to the infrared headsets so that an interpreter in the room can interpret directly to listeners.", "Specifies a portable encrypted RF assistive listening system, with a microphone for voice pickup, in jury deliberation rooms, and a portable or fixed encrypted RF system in judicial and executive conference rooms. Jury assembly rooms get a single-channel system, and training rooms an RF or infrared one.", "Specifies gooseneck microphones at the judge's bench, the attorney tables (two on each table, with a mute button and light) and the witness station, optional microphones for the clerk, court reporter and bailiff, and at least two handheld wireless microphones for the jury, litigants and voir dire.", "Asks for pink-noise sound masking in all zones except the bench when the judge calls a sidebar, and an optional boundary microphone at the judge's position to record the sidebar or feed the court reporter's headphones.", "Asks for a courtroom telephone system with echo cancelling on every microphone input, whose output can feed either the ceiling loudspeakers or channel 2 of the assistive listening system when the interpreter is remote, and videoconferencing with echo cancelling on every input in the judicial conference room.", "Asks for speech reinforcement to be designed and commissioned to AVIXA A102.01:2017 on audio coverage uniformity.", "Sections 18.E.5(e), 18.E.8(b) and 18.E.9(c) specify both voice-pickup microphones and multimedia audio inputs for the encrypted RF assistive systems in jury deliberation, judicial conference and executive conference rooms respectively." ], "limitations": "Design standards for California trial courthouses. They give no performance figures for the assistive listening systems themselves and do not mention hearing loops, Bluetooth or Auracast. The Judicial Council's page gives 2023 as the approval date; the PDF's adoption line still carries placeholder text, and its file name suggests a September 2024 file.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "ccaa-2023-survey-graphs", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ccaa-2023-survey-graphs/", "title": "CCAA Survey on Assistive Communication Technology: Graphs", "authors": "Committee for Communication Access in America", "publisher": "Committee for Communication Access in America (ccaa.name)", "date": "2023-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Paper (survey response charts)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (an ad hoc committee of hearing-loss advocates chaired by Stephen O. Frazier (Loop New Mexico; a founding member of HLAA's Get in the Hearing Loop initiative), among them hearing loop advocates David Myers and Juliette Sterkens; funding not stated; the survey page says the responses were recorded by the Frost Center for Data and Social Research at Hope College)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ccaa.name/CCAA_Graphs.pdf", "summary": "The response counts behind the CCAA's 2024 survey report: one bar chart per question, with the question wording, for 1,519 self-selected US respondents with hearing loss.", "findings": [ "Q20-Q22 (pp. 24-26) support calculated substantive-response bases of 961, 880 and 719 after excluding their respective non-applicable categories. Always plus usually gives 354/961 = 36.8%, 342/880 = 38.9% and 496/719 = 69.0%, rounded to 37%, 39% and 69%. These aggregates overlap the individual frequency categories.", "Q23A (p. 27) describes Wi-Fi audio sent to a personal smartphone or loaner receiver, heard through a headset, neckloop or Bluetooth-capable hearing aid or earbuds. It asks whether respondents have experienced such a system, without a recall interval or session count.", "Q18A (p. 22) asks about avoiding events without assistive communication accommodations where following proceedings would be difficult even with hearing aids or an implant. The question covers communication accommodations generally, rather than assistive listening alone.", "Q7 (p. 8; 1,487 answers, multiple selections) records 740 selections for telecoils/T-switch, 262 for a remote microphone or other device with a telecoil, and 53 for no hearing aid or implant. The two telecoil categories cannot be added to establish a count of unique people.", "Q8 (p. 10; 1,483 answers) asks whether telecoils would be essential when buying the next hearing device: yes 734, no 272, unsure 342, unfamiliar with telecoils 135. Among yes/no answers, 734/1,006 is 73.0% (calculated). Q9 (p. 12; 1,484 answers) asks the equivalent generic Bluetooth question: yes 1,273, no 54, unsure 122, unfamiliar 35; 1,273/1,327 yes/no answers is 95.9% (calculated). Neither asks about venue procurement.", "Q10 (p. 14; 1,469 answers) asks residents of AZ, DE, FL, IN, NM, NY, UT and WA about professional telecoil counselling before fitting: yes 167, no 188, cannot remember 62, live elsewhere 1,052. Q11 (p. 15; 1,474 answers) asks residents of other states: yes 327, no 490, not applicable 657. These self-reports do not establish the effect of a counselling law.", "Q12 (p. 16; 1,328 answers, multiple selections) records telecoil use with venue loops 536, counter loops 118, and FM/infrared receivers with neckloops 150. A further 223 selected having telecoils but not using them; 519 selected not applicable. The non-use option covers telecoils generally, including personal and telephone use.", "Q13 (p. 17; 1,335 answers, multiple selections) records learning about telecoils from hearing professionals 557, support groups 465 and the internet 267; 232 knew nothing about telecoils before the survey.", "Q15 (p. 19; 1,348 answers) asks how often people seek or request hearing assistance at public gatherings: always 351, usually 280, half the time 102, seldom 230, never 385. The prompt includes captions as well as listening systems.", "Q17 (p. 21; 1,303 answers, multiple selections) asks which accommodations people most commonly find: FM/headsets 275, FM including neckloops 197, infrared/headsets 71, infrared including neckloops 58, hearing loops 226, other audio systems 101, CART 245, handheld captions 374, and unsure of some systems 475. These counts describe selections by respondents, not shares of installations or venue visits.", "Q18A (p. 22; 1,353 answers) asks about avoiding events with no assistive communication accommodation: yes 612, sometimes 365, no 315, not applicable 61. Q19A (p. 23; 1,179 answers) asks about problems with assistive listening: seldom 288, sometimes 307, half the time 122, fairly often 277, very often 185. Its examples include batteries, staff, neckloops, malfunction and signage; it gives no separate prevalence for each problem.", "Q27 (p. 31) offers receiver/headset arrangements as part of the listening-system alternatives. Its counts sum to 1,335: 804 named a system and 312 chose one of the five listening systems. The calculated loop shares are 187/312 = 59.9% of listening-system choices and 187/804 = 23.3% of all system choices; captions are 492/804 = 61.2%. This is a hypothetical listener recommendation.", "The companion survey page (https://www.ccaa.name/SurveyText.html, Questionnaire section) dates the online questionnaire to 5-24 September 2023 and attributes recording of the 1,519 responses to the Frost Center at Hope College. This provides fieldwork dates separately from the charts' PDF creation date.", "Asked which single system they would recommend for their city council chamber (1,335 answers), 492 chose CART or captions, 187 a hearing loop, 61 Wi-Fi audio, 40 FM/RF, 13 a wired system and 11 infrared; 531 said they did not feel well enough informed to recommend one. This is the only question that asks respondents to choose between the assistive listening technologies.", "Where a system requires borrowing a receiver and headset (1,327 answers), 189 always borrow one, 165 usually, 35 half the time, 189 sometimes and 383 never; 366 answered not applicable.", "Where a system requires borrowing a receiver and neckloop for use with telecoils (1,312 answers), 205 always borrow one, 137 usually, 25 half the time, 163 sometimes and 350 never; 432 do not have telecoils.", "Asked how often telecoil users listen through their telecoils in a looped venue (1,309 answers), 367 said always, 129 usually, 23 half the time, 97 sometimes and 103 never; 424 have no telecoils and 166 never go anywhere with a hearing loop.", "Asked how often hearing assistance is readily available (1,290 answers), 20 said always, 178 usually, 289 half the time, 576 seldom and 227 never.", "217 of 1,321 respondents had used an audio-over-Wi-Fi system. Of the 251 who rated its delay, 119 were not conscious of it, 88 found it distracting and 44 objectionable.", "Q23A (p. 27) has 1,321 answers: 217 yes and 1,104 no to Wi-Fi experience. Q24 (p. 28) has 1,269 answers: 119 not conscious of delay, 88 distracting, 44 objectionable and 1,018 not applicable. Its 251 substantive ratings exceed the 217 experience answers, and the charts do not explain the mismatch." ], "limitations": "Charts of counts only, with no title page, date, method or commentary; any percentage has to be worked out from the counts. The sample is the self-selected, mostly senior, mostly severe-to-profound one described in the report, recruited through hearing-loss websites, newsletters and groups. The report's figure of 69% of telecoil users who \"always use\" a loop matches always plus usually in these counts (496 of 719), with 367 (51%) always. The report's statement that over 60% preferred hearing loops among five technologies appears to rest on the council-chamber question, where 187 of the 312 respondents who picked one of the five assistive listening options chose the loop. Auracast was not offered as an option. No date is printed: the year comes from the PDF's creation date (20 November 2023), and the survey page that links the charts says the questionnaire was online from 5 to 24 September 2023.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "infrared-limits", "courts-and-chambers", "using-each-system", "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "williams-r37-receiver-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-r37-receiver-manual/", "title": "PPA R37 FM Select Receiver: Instructions for Use and Care (MAN154G)", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV", "date": "2023-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer receiver manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, maker of the receiver)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/MAN-154G-R37-2021.pdf", "summary": "Instructions show the power, volume, attachment and channel-selection steps for one dedicated FM receiver.", "findings": [ "The operating sequence is to fit batteries, connect an earphone or neckloop, turn on the receiver, adjust volume and select the channel. The channel-seek button is inside the battery compartment.", "Where several transmitters are active, the user presses seek again to reach the wanted channel. The receiver retains its channel when switched off and provides a channel lock.", "A green indicator uses different flash patterns for channel status, low batteries and absence of a transmitter. The power switch and volume control share a rotary control." ], "limitations": "Instructions for this manufacturer's model, not evidence that all FM receivers have these controls or that listeners find them easy to use. The year comes from the printed 2023 copyright on the final page, despite the filename ending in 2021. No usability participants or completion times are reported.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "using-each-system" ] }, { "id": "ryoo-2023-spade", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ryoo-2023-spade/", "title": "SPADE: Secure Periodic Advertising using Coded Time-Channel Rendezvous for BLE Audio", "authors": "Ryoo D, Yoo Y, Paek J, Bahk S", "publisher": "IEEE DCOSS-IoT 2023", "date": "2023-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Peer-reviewed conference paper", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Government (Korean Ministry of Environment through KEITI, grant 2021002280002; MSIT through IITP, grant IITP-2023-2021-0-02048; and MSIT through NRF, grant 2021R1A2C1008840; researchers at Seoul National University and Chung-Ang University)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://nsl.cau.ac.kr/~jpaek/docs/spade-dcoss-iot-2023.pdf", "summary": "Tests selective jamming of Bluetooth periodic advertising and proposes a defence, using development boards and simulations rather than finished Auracast hearing devices.", "findings": [ "The paper identifies plaintext timing and channel information in periodic advertising as enabling selective interference with synchronization packets. It studies a shared mechanism used by Auracast, rather than end-to-end listening.", "Section V uses nRF52840 boards with one broadcaster, one jammer and seven scanners. Five runs each contain 10,000 periodic-advertising events.", "Without the proposed defence, the seven scanners averaged 91.36% packet reception without jamming; under the tested attack every scanner fell below 5%. With SPADE, reception under attack exceeded 80% at every scanner. These are packet reception ratios, not speech scores.", "SPADE distributes device-specific timing and channel information through brief connections and uses receiver feedback to identify and exclude an attacker. Section IV notes that it reacts after an attack begins and that an attacker can seek readmission with another identity." ], "limitations": "A laboratory periodic-advertising experiment plus simulations, with no listeners, commercial hearing-aid sample or occupied venue trial. The proposed changes require implementation support and are not evidence of a protection already available in venue products. Year from the proceedings line and copyright; DOI 10.1109/DCOSS-IoT58021.2023.00015.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "sennheiser-2023-mobileconnect-spec", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sennheiser-2023-mobileconnect-spec/", "title": "System Specification (V1.2): MobileConnect Assistive Listening", "authors": "Sennheiser", "publisher": "Sennheiser electronic GmbH & Co. KG", "date": "2023-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer data sheet", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sennheiser, maker of the MobileConnect Wi-Fi system)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://assets.sennheiser.com/download/assets/MobileConnect_System_Specification_v1.2_EN.pdf/ea3cf3b2e7b711f097eaea55b5d2fb86", "summary": "Sennheiser's five-page data sheet for MobileConnect, a system that streams venue audio over Wi-Fi to an app on listeners' own phones.", "findings": [ "Gives the app's latency as \"40-60 ms on average\" and the station's capacity as 100 simultaneous clients.", "Describes a bring-your-own-device system that works through the venue's existing Wi-Fi network, with listeners hearing the stream through personal induction neckloops, headphones or hearing aids.", "Its architect's specification says the system shall support all wireless and wired headphones, hearing aids and cochlear implants, and that each central unit allows up to 100 users.", "Page 2 places the 40 Hz-20 kHz response, 101 dB(A) signal-to-noise ratio and -82 dB(A) THD+N under the XLR connectors heading. These figures do not specify a measured phone-to-ear listening path. The sheet does not name the live streaming codec." ], "limitations": "A maker's data sheet: the latency is an average with no stated method, phones, network load or listening path (wired, neckloop or Bluetooth), and the capacity is given per station without network conditions. No date is printed; the year comes from the PDF's creation date (16 January 2023). Sennheiser's MobileConnect product page linked this version on 9 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "rennies-2022", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rennies-2022/", "title": "Spatio-temporal integration of speech reflections in hearing-impaired listeners", "authors": "Rennies J, Warzybok A, Kollmeier B, Brand T", "publisher": "Trends in Hearing 26:23312165221143901", "date": "2022-12-19", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Media Technology IDMT and University of Oldenburg, Cluster of Excellence Hearing4all; funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG, SFB 1330) and the Klaus Tschira Foundation; the authors declare no conflicts of interest)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9772954/", "summary": "Measured how well older listeners with hearing loss understand speech in noise when it arrives with one or more delayed copies of itself, up to 200 ms late, compared with young normal-hearing listeners tested earlier.", "findings": [ "14 native German speakers aged 45 to 84, most over 70, with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss, repeated sentences in speech-shaped noise over headphones, with individual linear amplification (NAL-RP) to restore audibility; their results were compared with a group of normal-hearing listeners aged 18 to 31 from the authors' earlier study.", "With one delayed copy as loud as the direct speech, thresholds worsened as the delay grew from 10 to 200 ms. At 200 ms, the speech-to-noise ratio needed rose by 6.5 dB on average for the listeners with hearing loss, against 3.4 dB for the normal-hearing group; some listeners needed a positive speech-to-noise ratio (up to +8 dB) to understand half the words.", "When the 200 ms copy was much louder than the direct sound (2.5 times its amplitude, the largest ratio tested), every listener's threshold returned close to their result with no copy at all; the copy hurt most when the two were about equally loud.", "With several delayed copies spread over 200 ms, many listeners could not reach 50% understanding even at +20 dB: for seven copies, no threshold could be measured for 8 of the 14.", "The authors conclude that listeners with hearing loss were generally less able than normal-hearing listeners to ignore the earlier sound when the useful speech came later, and that individual results were predicted better by speech-in-noise performance in simple conditions than by the audiogram." ], "limitations": "Artificial room responses over headphones in a laboratory, with copies delayed by no more than 200 ms; no hearing aids, assistive listening stream or real room. Small group of 14, compared with a normal-hearing group from an earlier study that was much younger.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "hlaa-2022-google-maps-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hlaa-2022-google-maps-loops/", "title": "Google Maps Now Includes Hearing Loops", "authors": "Perazzoli C (volunteer chair, Get in the Hearing Loop programme)", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America", "date": "2022-12-14", "kind": "Advocacy article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Hearing Loss Association of America, a US consumer organisation for people with hearing loss; written by the volunteer chair of its Get in the Hearing Loop programme)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/google-maps-now-includes-hearing-loops/", "summary": "HLAA's announcement that Google Maps now shows an accessibility attribute for assistive hearing loops, added at the request of its loop programme.", "findings": [ "Reports that Google added an assistive hearing loop attribute to Google Maps at the request of HLAA's Get in the Hearing Loop committee, so that people can find out before they go whether a business or venue has a loop.", "Says the programme is helping Google add loop locations to its database and that venues can also update their own profiles.", "Explains where the attribute appears: in the About section of a place's listing on a phone, or through the arrow next to the description on a computer.", "Asks readers to spread the word, to write hearing loop reviews on venues' Google Maps listings, with a photo of the loop sign where possible, and to use reviews to ask venues to install a loop.", "States that most prescription hearing aids and cochlear implants have telecoils, and advises asking an audiologist or hearing instrument specialist how to use the function." ], "limitations": "An announcement with no figures on how many venues carry the attribute, how entries are checked or whether listed loops work; the entries described come from HLAA volunteers and from venues themselves. First published on 14 December 2022; the page records a change on 23 January 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "picou-2022", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/picou-2022/", "title": "Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction Results from the MarkeTrak 2022 Survey: Importance of Features and Hearing Care Professionals", "authors": "Picou EM", "publisher": "Seminars in Hearing 43(4):301-316 (Thieme)", "date": "2022-12-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Paper (journal article analysing an industry consumer survey)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Trade body (MarkeTrak is supported by the Hearing Industries Association, the US hearing aid industry's association; the issue editorial identifies guest editor Thomas Powers with Powers Consulting, not HIA; the author, of Vanderbilt University Medical Center, declares no conflicts of interest)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9715311/", "summary": "Results from the MarkeTrak 2022 survey of US hearing aid owners, with a three-survey comparison of which features, including telecoils and phone streaming, owners say their hearing aids have.", "findings": [ "The companion methods article by Carr and Kihm, MarkeTrak-Tracking the Pulse of the Hearing Aid Market (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9715310/), Research Method Overview, dates MT2022 fieldwork to November-December 2021: 15,138 households, 43,957 household members, and 3,218 detailed respondents with hearing loss, including 1,139 hearing aid owners. Its Research Method section describes online sampling with census-based quotas and household/individual weighting. These overall counts differ from Picou's 815 recent-owner feature sample.", "Owners who got hearing aids in the past five years said their aids have a telecoil in 33% of cases in MarkeTrak 2022 (n=815), against 20% in MarkeTrak 10 (n=702) and 23% in MarkeTrak 9 (n=782); the paper labels the two earlier surveys 2019 and 2015. The survey's wording described the telecoil as being for the telephone or public places with a hearing loop.", "Over the same surveys, the share able to stream sound directly from a smartphone rose from 2% (MarkeTrak 9) to 13% (MarkeTrak 10) and 44% (MarkeTrak 2022), and the share with a smartphone app from 6% to 17% and 44%.", "Reported telecoils differed by how the aids were fitted: 29% of owners fitted in person, 59% of those fitted remotely and 43% of self-fitters. The author says it is unclear whether this reflects the devices on offer or professionals' choices.", "Asked which of their own features most improved their listening (up to three), 6% of owners with a telecoil who were fitted in person or remotely, and 3% of self-fitters, chose the telecoil; of owners able to stream directly from a smartphone, 23% (fitted in person), 13% (remotely) and 7% (self-fitted) chose streaming. The table gives each share among owners who have the feature, not among all owners.", "90% of owners with a telecoil were satisfied with their hearing aids, against 82% of owners without one.", "Table 4, on the features with the most positive impact, lists fitting-channel samples of 429 in-person owners, 45 remote owners and 27 self-fitters. These differ from Table 3, on feature ownership, which lists 716, 51 and 48 respectively.", "Table 1 gives 815 owners who obtained aids within five years and 44% reporting direct smartphone streaming. The companion issue editorial, MarkeTrak 2022: Insights into the Evolving Hearing Market (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9715304/), states that the Hearing Industries Association supports the surveys." ], "limitations": "Self-reported features, so the figures show what owners know their aids have, not what is fitted; the jump in telecoils between MarkeTrak 10 and MarkeTrak 2022 is not explained. The survey does not ask about venue systems. MarkeTrak 2022 was fielded in late 2021 with 15,138 census-balanced US households (3,218 people with self-reported hearing loss), per a companion article in the same issue. Predates Auracast hearing aids.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "rugeley-2022-chamber-loop-quotes", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rugeley-2022-chamber-loop-quotes/", "title": "Item 124: Hearing Loop in Chamber", "authors": "Rugeley Town Council (Town Clerk)", "publisher": "Rugeley Town Council (meeting papers)", "date": "2022-11-29", "kind": "Council report (informational agenda item with installers' quotes)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Rugeley Town Council, an English town council; report by its Town Clerk)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://rugeleytowncouncil.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Item-124-Hearing-Loop-in-Chamber.pdf", "summary": "An English town council's agenda paper setting out three firms' quotes for a hearing loop and microphones in its council chamber.", "findings": [ "Says the council had received a report on the legal requirement to make reasonable changes, including auxiliary aids such as an induction loop in public buildings, and asked the clerk to obtain quotes for a loop and microphones in the chamber.", "Three companies quoted six options, net of VAT: £1,179 for a floor or wall loop with two shotgun microphones; £1,250 for a floor or wall loop with one plug-in microphone; £2,750 for a ceiling loop with the same microphone, from the same firm; £3,939 for a floor or wall loop with a hanging condenser microphone, amplifier and mixer, or £5,134 with a speaker system added; and £4,351.20 for the shotgun-microphone option with a 75-inch display, soundbar and cables.", "With VAT the options ranged from £1,414.80 to £6,160.80, and the paper asked councillors to choose a system and any optional extras.", "The one-page Quotes table gives VAT and tax-inclusive totals respectively as: option 1a £550 and £3,300; 1b £250 and £1,500; the first 2a £787.80 and £4,726.80; the second 2a, with speakers, £1,026.80 and £6,160.80; 3a £235.80 and £1,414.80; and 3b £870.24 and £5,221.44. The source repeats label 2a. Both company 1 alternatives include a plug-in microphone with a 6 m lead; both company 2 alternatives specify a CHM 99 hanging microphone; option 3b also lists the display's mounting bracket." ], "limitations": "Quotes for one council chamber, without the room's size, a site survey, field strength targets or a commissioning test; the paper does not say whether the quotes meet IEC 60118-4. A follow-up paper (Item 143) records a site visit and a revised quote and was not used for these findings. Date from the PDF's creation date (29 November 2022); the file sits in a 2024 upload folder.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs", "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "lin-2022-smartphone-earphones", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/lin-2022-smartphone-earphones/", "title": "Smartphone-bundled earphones as personal sound amplification products in adults with sensorineural hearing loss", "authors": "Lin HYH, Lai HS, Huang CY, Chen CH, Wu SL, Chu YC, Chen YF, Lai YH, Cheng YF", "publisher": "iScience 25(12):105436 (Cell Press)", "date": "2022-11-15", "kind": "Peer-reviewed laboratory study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Taiwan National Science and Technology Council grants and Veterans General Hospitals and University System of Taiwan Joint Research Program; authors declare no competing interests)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9801236/", "summary": "A laboratory comparison of hearing aids and smartphone earphones in 21 adults with mild to moderate hearing loss and no hearing-aid experience.", "findings": [ "Tested AirPods 2 and AirPods Pro with an iPhone XS Max running iOS 13.0 against premium Oticon Opn 1 and basic Bernafon MD1 hearing aids, using Mandarin sentences.", "AirPods Pro and the hearing aids did not differ significantly in quiet. With speech and noise both in front, the premium aid gave a 2.1 dB better speech-in-noise threshold than AirPods Pro; with noise from the side, that difference was not significant.", "The authors frame the earphones as personal sound amplification products and discuss Live Listen. This is evidence about an earphone listening path, not reception of a venue broadcast.", "The MHINT results section and Table 4 report better speech reception thresholds with AirPods Pro than unaided in quiet (p < 0.05), but no statistically significant improvement over unaided listening with noise from the front (p = 0.25) or left (p = 0.14). These comparisons are distinct from the device-to-device comparisons in Table 5." ], "limitations": "Small, single-blind laboratory study, with first-fit hearing-aid settings rather than real-ear verification. It predates Apple's Hearing Aid feature and tests neither Auracast nor venue Wi-Fi. Results cannot establish equivalence across environments or apply to other earbud models.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "communicourt-2022-hearing-loops-court", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/communicourt-2022-hearing-loops-court/", "title": "Hearing loops in court proceedings: The good, the bad and the squeaky", "authors": "Communicourt", "publisher": "Communicourt (news)", "date": "2022-10-31", "kind": "Practitioner article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (Communicourt, a UK company that provides intermediaries to help vulnerable people communicate in court; no author is named)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.communicourt.co.uk/news/hearing-loops-court-proceedings/", "summary": "A court intermediary company's account of hearing loops in courts in England and Wales, with a case in which a remote video link made a loop unusable, and its suggestions for intermediaries and courts.", "findings": [ "Describes a hearing in which a service user was given loop equipment with headphones. When the prosecution barrister began speaking remotely over the Cloud Video Platform link, the loop produced \"a very loud squealing sound\"; the service user stopped using it and relied on the intermediary's summaries.", "Says the loop \"picks up every sound\", from typing to the shuffling of papers, and that this background noise affects how well speech can be heard.", "Cites an anonymous account of a respondent offered an infrared receiver with earbuds, which would have meant removing the hearing aids the respondent depended on.", "Recommends learning about the person's hearing beforehand, avoiding hybrid hearings, trialling the equipment in advance, giving the person a way to signal difficulty and a self-rating scale, reducing background noise and choosing seating that helps lip-reading.", "Its case study describes a party joining remotely making the hearing loop generate considerable feedback, a very loud squealing sound, and it advises avoiding hybrid hearings because remote attendance can cause feedback for loop users." ], "limitations": "A practitioner article with one case described in outline and no measurements; it does not name the court or the equipment, or say how the remote audio was connected to the loop. Its figures on Crown Court loops and its quotation from a judge come from sources recorded separately here.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "fda-2022-prescription-labeling", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/fda-2022-prescription-labeling/", "title": "21 CFR 801.422: Prescription hearing aid labeling", "authors": "US Food and Drug Administration", "publisher": "Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21", "date": "2022-10-17", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Food and Drug Administration)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-H/part-801/subpart-H/section-801.422", "summary": "The US labelling rule for prescription hearing aids, which requires telecoil sensitivity, measured to the ANSI hearing aid standard, and latency to be given in the user brochure.", "findings": [ "Requires the technical specification values for prescription hearing aids to be determined with the test procedures of ANSI/ASA S3.22-2014 (R2020), which the rule incorporates by reference, except for latency.", "Requires specifications \"useful in selecting, fitting, and checking the performance\" of the aid to appear in the user brochure or accompanying labelling, including induction coil sensitivity for aids with a telephone coil.", "Lists latency among the required specifications, \"measured using a method that is accurate and repeatable to within 1.5 ms\", the one value not determined with the ANSI standard's test procedures.", "The matching section for over-the-counter hearing aids, 21 CFR 800.30(c)(4), lists six technical specifications (maximum output, full-on gain, harmonic distortion, self-generated noise, latency and bandwidth) and no induction coil sensitivity; its paragraph (e)(3) limits the latency of an over-the-counter aid to 15 ms, measured with a method accurate and repeatable to within 1.5 ms, among electroacoustic limits that are measured with an acoustic coupler where applicable." ], "limitations": "Read from the eCFR text current in October 2026; the section's latest amendment is dated 17 October 2022, the date used here. The rule requires a reported value, not a minimum sensitivity or a check of the telecoil as fitted. The ANSI standard itself is sold and was not read. Neither section deals with latency over a wireless link, such as streaming to the aid; 21 CFR 800.30 was read in the eCFR text current in October 2026 (latest amendment 17 October 2022).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "listen-2022-lt82-ir-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2022-lt82-ir-manual/", "title": "LT-82 & LA-140 User Manual: Stationary IR Transmitter and Stationary IR Radiator", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2022-09-26", "kind": "Manufacturer user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the ListenIR transmitter and radiator described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/LT-82-_-LA-140-User-Manual-2022-09-26.pdf", "summary": "The maker's design and installation manual for its stationary infrared transmitter and radiator, covering how sunlight, lighting, room surfaces, channel count and emitter ageing affect coverage.", "findings": [ "Says its systems use higher modulation frequencies (carriers at 2.3, 2.8, 3.3 and 3.8 MHz) that make them less susceptible to fluorescent lighting, but are not immune to sources of infrared light such as sunlight and plasma displays.", "Explains that infrared is line of sight in open space, while light-coloured, reflective surfaces extend coverage; in a very large room a listener may need to point the receiver at the radiator.", "States that its products work with other makers' systems that use the same carrier frequencies.", "Rates one radiator at about 10,000 sq ft (929 square metres) for one channel with its LR-42 and LR-44 receivers, falling to 5,000 sq ft for two channels and 2,500 sq ft for four, and about 40,000 sq ft for one channel with its LR-4200 and LR-5200 receivers.", "Says radiators are under-rated by 40 percent because emitter output falls by that much after about 8,000 operating hours, so systems should be designed from the published coverage patterns rather than by trial and error.", "Recommends at least two radiators except in small rooms, overlapping coverage, extra radiators for shaded areas such as under balconies, and a delay adjustment where the coverage of radiators overlaps.", "Calls infrared secure and free of radio interference compared with radio transmission.", "The Design Guide, printed p. 7, pairs 5,000 sq ft with 465 m² for two channels and 2,500 sq ft with 232 m² for four channels using LR-42/LR-44 receivers. It pairs 40,000 sq ft with 3,716 m² for one channel using LR-4200-IR/LR-5200-IR receivers. These are the manual’s stated equivalents.", "Printed page 23 lists wireless end-to-end frequency response of 63 Hz-15 kHz ±3 dB, A-weighted signal-to-noise ratio above 60 dB in mono or 52 dB in stereo, and total harmonic distortion below 2%. These are manufacturer system specifications.", "Troubleshooting (printed page 57) identifies noise or distortion near the edge of coverage and interference or noise from windows and sunlight." ], "limitations": "The maker's figures for its own products, without independent measurement; it does not discuss LED lighting. The troubleshooting section does warn that windows and sunlight can cause interference and receiver noise. Date from the file name and the PDF's creation date; the manual itself shows no date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "infrared-limits", "lifetime-costs", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "listen-2022-disinfect-devices", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2022-disinfect-devices/", "title": "Don't Forget to Disinfect Your Devices", "authors": "Listen Technologies (Listen Team)", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (blog)", "date": "2022-09-23", "kind": "Manufacturer article", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, which sells assistive listening receivers and neckloops and the disinfecting wipes the article promotes)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/dont-forget-to-disinfect-your-devices/", "summary": "A maker's short guidance on disinfecting loaned assistive listening equipment, including neck loop lanyards, between users.", "findings": [ "Calls sanitizing and disinfecting all assistive listening and tour equipment after each use an integral part of the guest experience, and cites the CDC's advice to clean frequently touched surfaces daily with EPA-registered disinfectants.", "Promotes the maker's water-based wipes, without bleach or alcohol, which it says an independent lab approved for its transceivers, receivers, earbuds, ear speakers, headphones and neck loop lanyards; equipment should stay wet for at least four minutes.", "Says alcohol- or bleach-based disinfectants also work but may damage casings, screens and labels, recommends a patch test with other products, and gives typical wet contact times of 4 to 6 minutes, up to 10 minutes for natural-based cleaners." ], "limitations": "A maker's promotional article for its own cleaning product; the lab approval and kill rates are its claims, without a report. It gives no evidence on how often loaned equipment is cleaned or on infection risk. Last modified on 4 March 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "neckloops", "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "fda-2022-otc-hearing-aids", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/fda-2022-otc-hearing-aids/", "title": "Medical Devices; Ear, Nose, and Throat Devices; Establishing Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids (final rule, 87 FR 50698)", "authors": "US Food and Drug Administration", "publisher": "Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 158", "date": "2022-08-17", "kind": "Regulation (final rule)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Food and Drug Administration)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/08/17/2022-17230/medical-devices-ear-nose-and-throat-devices-establishing-over-the-counter-hearing-aids", "summary": "The US rule that created over-the-counter hearing aids, including the FDA's reasons for not requiring telecoils or telecoil labelling.", "findings": [ "Establishes the over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aid category for people aged 18 or older with perceived mild to moderate hearing loss; the rule took effect on 17 October 2022.", "Responding to some comments that asked for OTC packaging to explain telecoils, the FDA declined because not all OTC hearing aids will have one; where an aid does have a telecoil, its labelling must explain it as part of adequate directions for use (Comment 47).", "Responding to a comment that OTC aids should be required to include Bluetooth or a telecoil, the FDA declined, saying telecoils may be practical for larger devices but users may prefer smaller ones, and that requiring such features could raise cost and hinder innovation and adoption (Comment 94).", "Asked by a few comments to require a list of basic features, including any telecoil, on the outside package, the FDA declined, pointing to the outside-package requirements it did adopt on batteries and smartphone compatibility (Comment 55)." ], "limitations": "The rule neither requires nor forbids telecoils and gives no figures on how many OTC hearing aids have them. The record attributes the telecoil requests to \"some comments\" and \"a comment\" and does not say how many there were.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "listener-reach", "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "access-board-2022-signs-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/access-board-2022-signs-guide/", "title": "Guide to the ADA Accessibility Standards, Chapter 7: Signs", "authors": "US Access Board", "publisher": "US Access Board (access-board.gov)", "date": "2022-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Regulatory guidance (technical guide)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Access Board, a federal agency)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.access-board.gov/ada/guides/chapter-7-signs/", "summary": "The Access Board's plain-language guide to the sign rules in the 2010 ADA Standards, including the sign that tells patrons an assistive listening system is available.", "findings": [ "Explains that sections 216.10 and 703.7.2.4 require signs with the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss, meeting the visual criteria for signs, to show that assistive listening systems are available in assembly areas, and that the signs can be placed at each assembly area or at each ticket office or window.", "States that the wording on these signs is not specified, and adds that \"it is helpful to indicate where assistive listening devices can be acquired\".", "Names the hearing-loss symbol, the International Symbol of Accessibility and the International Symbol of TTY as the three symbols the Standards require in certain places, each with a non-glare finish and contrast with its background (703.7.1).", "Uses one symbol for every kind of assistive listening system; the guide says nothing about telecoil, Bluetooth or Wi-Fi signs, QR codes or online information.", "Notes that variable message signs and remote infrared audible sign systems are not addressed by the ADA Standards but are covered by the ICC A117.1 standard." ], "limitations": "Technical assistance that explains the Standards and adds no requirements. The page carries the date August 2022, which may be its last revision rather than its first publication.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "kozma-spytek-2022", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/kozma-spytek-2022/", "title": "Trends in Audio Streaming for Hearing Aids and Hearing Aid Compatibility for Wireless Phones", "authors": "Kozma-Spytek L", "publisher": "HearingTracker", "date": "2022-07-22", "kind": "Article (analysis of a hearing aid product database)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (analysis prepared to inform the ATIS Hearing Aid Compatibility Task Force by Linda Kozma-Spytek, whose author note describes the author as a technology consultant to HLAA and an investigator at Gallaudet University's DHH Tech RERC; data from HearingTracker's product database, provided by its CEO Abram Bailey; published by HearingTracker, a consumer hearing aid site that carries advertising)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingtracker.com/news/trends-in-audio-streaming-for-hearing-aids", "summary": "A ten-year count of how many hearing aid models released from 2012 to 2021 had a telecoil and how many had Bluetooth streaming.", "findings": [ "Covers 806 hearing aid models with release dates from 2012 through 2021 from the main manufacturers' brands in HearingTracker's database, built from makers' specification sheets.", "Finds that the inclusion of telecoils in hearing aids \"has somewhat declined\" over the ten years, while Bluetooth Low Energy streaming (Apple's MFi, then Google's ASHA) grew steadily.", "Models with only a microphone, or a microphone plus telecoil, declined in favour of models with some form of Bluetooth; in 2020 and 2021 most models had Bluetooth and about half of those also had a telecoil.", "Taking models released from 2017 to 2021 as those on the market in 2021, 54% included a telecoil and 80% were Bluetooth capable; of the Bluetooth models, 61% supported MFi (a third of these also ASHA) and 19% were Bluetooth Classic only.", "Notes that telecoils work with any telecoil-compatible phone or hearing loop regardless of brand, while MFi works only with iPhones, and expects LE Audio, which also enables Auracast broadcasts, to become the more universal option." ], "limitations": "Counts models, not hearing aids sold or fitted; the author says availability does not translate directly into sales or use. The database is not exhaustive and its inclusion rests on market share and judgement. Covers releases up to 2021, before Auracast hearing aids. The article reports the telecoil trend in a chart and gives yearly percentages only for the 2017-2021 window.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "listener-reach", "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2022-venue-market-note", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2022-venue-market-note/", "title": "Sizing the Opportunity for Auracast Broadcast Audio in Public Locations (market research note)", "authors": "Raskind C (Strategy Analytics)", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "2022-07-21", "kind": "Paper (market research note commissioned by a trade body)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Trade body (commissioned by the Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies that owns the Auracast trademark, from the market research firm Strategy Analytics)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/MRN_Auracast.pdf", "summary": "A market research note commissioned by the Auracast trademark owner on how many public venues might adopt Auracast, including its view of what drives venues to install assistive listening.", "findings": [ "Says it combined desk research on global venue counts with in-depth interviews of venue owners and decision makers, industry figures in consumer electronics and established assistive listening technologies, and professionals in audiology and the hearing loss community.", "Calls regional regulation, compliance and enforcement one of the key drivers of Auracast adoption for assistive listening, and says adherence to regulations has been greater in Europe and the UK, where it sees higher levels of compliance with loops, FM and infrared.", "States that a large percentage of venues in the US and Asia Pacific are out of line with assistive listening rules and that enforcement is largely absent, and that Auracast's \"dramatically lower implementation and support costs\" could drive significant change.", "Describes Auracast as a \"high-quality, low-cost, next-generation assistive listening system\" for venues with public address systems, and expects the ecosystem to drive costs down.", "Its cost sentence (p. 10) names no system that Auracast's implementation and support costs are compared with." ], "limitations": "Commissioned by the trademark owner to size a market. It does not say how many people were interviewed or what they said, and gives no cost figures for Auracast or any other system. Written in 2022, before Auracast assistive listening products were widely available. Date from the SIG's resource page for the note (published 21 July 2022).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "moj-2022-crown-court-hearing-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/moj-2022-crown-court-hearing-loops/", "title": "Crown Court: Hearing Impairment (written question 31786)", "authors": "Pursglove T (Ministry of Justice), answering a question from Thornberry E", "publisher": "UK Parliament (written questions and answers)", "date": "2022-07-14", "kind": "Regulatory report (parliamentary written answer listing Crown Courts with hearing loops)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (UK Ministry of Justice answer to a written question in the House of Commons; the figures come from HM Courts & Tribunals Service's facilities management contract provider)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-07-06/31786", "summary": "The UK government's list of Crown Courts in England and Wales confirmed, and not confirmed, to have an operational hearing loop in June 2022.", "findings": [ "Lists 69 Crown Court locations confirmed by HMCTS's facilities management contract provider to have operational hearing loops as of June 2022, and 19 not confirmed, for the permanent estate only.", "Says courts without a loop on site may still have facilities or make reasonable adjustments, and that some of HMCTS's loop equipment is portable and can be moved between Crown Court sites.", "Says HMCTS's service assurance checks include accessibility for users with hearing disabilities, and that problems with providing and maintaining equipment are raised with the facilities management provider.", "Follows an answer of 27 June 2022 (question 21142) that gave at least 69 of 87 Crown Court locations as having loops on site, with a regional table totalling 89 locations that ran from 52% in the South East to 100% in two regions, and said HMCTS last carried out an internal facilities audit in 2019." ], "limitations": "A count of loops reported present by a maintenance contractor, not measurements: it says nothing about field strength, coverage, or whether the loops reach the witness box, dock or jury. The two answers give different totals (87, 88 and 89 locations). Crown Courts only.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "aaa-2022-broadcast-audio", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/aaa-2022-broadcast-audio/", "title": "Improved Access Through New Consumer Technology: Broadcast Audio", "authors": "American Academy of Audiology", "publisher": "American Academy of Audiology, Audiology in the News", "date": "2022-06-13", "kind": "Professional association news article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (American Academy of Audiology, professional association of audiologists; no separate funding stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.audiology.org/improved-access-through-new-consumer-technology-broadcast-audio/", "summary": "The Academy introduces Auracast and describes its participation in discussions about patient and provider needs.", "findings": [ "The June 2022 item presents access to public-address audio and public televisions as potential benefits once hearing device manufacturers make Auracast available.", "The Academy says it and past presidents Catherine Palmer and Angela Shoup participated in discussions with Bluetooth SIG to bring audiology, patient and provider needs into the work.", "The item contains no Auracast activation procedure, stream-to-microphone setting, fitting verification target or survey of clinical practice." ], "limitations": "A short launch-era news item, not a clinical practice guideline or a test. Its prospective device statements describe June 2022 and should not be used as a current compatibility list.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "starkey-2022-telecoil", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/starkey-2022-telecoil/", "title": "Benefits of Telecoil: Staying in the loop", "authors": "Starkey Laboratories (no individual authors named)", "publisher": "Starkey Laboratories (feature summary flyer FLYR3982-00-EE-ST)", "date": "2022-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer study (summary flyer)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Starkey Laboratories, a hearing aid maker, testing its own Evolv AI hearing aids; the same summary was also issued under its Audibel brand)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://cdn.mediavalet.com/usil/starkeyhearingtech/9XWBLQtc6E-UaYLkXHuSrg/xzi1xwCmpkef7cSGZmwjfQ/Original/Telecoil%20Feature%20Summary%20APR22_F.pdf", "summary": "A hearing aid maker's small study of speech understanding through a hearing loop, and of whether demonstrating the telecoil at the fitting helps users remember and use it.", "findings": [ "28 users of the maker's own hearing aids took part, 14 with behind-the-ear and 14 with completely-in-canal models. Seven of the behind-the-ear users had the telecoil demonstrated at their fitting; the other seven were only told about it.", "In a reverberant laboratory room, with sentences at 65 dBA and +10 dB SNR and the listener 3 m from a talking manikin, behind-the-ear users scored 9% of words with their directional microphones, 66% through the telecoil and a hearing loop, and 56% with a 2.4 GHz remote microphone; the telecoil and the remote microphone did not differ significantly.", "After one month, all 7 users who had the demonstration recalled what the telecoil mode was for, against 2 of the 7 who had only been told.", "After two months, at a simulated cinema with a hearing loop, 2 of the 7 who had the demonstration and 1 of the 7 who had not switched to the loop programme on their own; the others stayed in their default programme.", "Concludes that counselling and in-office demonstration matter, and suggests encouraging patients to compare settings in realistic situations." ], "limitations": "A maker's flyer about its own hearing aids, with no named authors, no dates of testing and no statistics for the demonstration comparison; seven people per group. Self-initiated use at the simulated cinema was low in both groups, which the conclusion does not discuss. The flyer is dated June 2022 (6/22), although its file name says April.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting", "signage-and-awareness", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "nassiri-2022-implant-utilization", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nassiri-2022-implant-utilization/", "title": "Current Estimates of Cochlear Implant Utilization in the United States", "authors": "Nassiri AM, Sorkin DL, Carlson ML", "publisher": "Otology & Neurotology 43(5):e558-e562 (Wolters Kluwer)", "date": "2022-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (publisher abstract)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (author analysis of a private marketing report; funding is not stated in the accessible publisher abstract)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://journals.lww.com/10.1097/MAO.0000000000003513", "summary": "An analysis of private market research estimates markedly different US implant uptake depending on which audiometric candidacy definition is used.", "findings": [ "The publisher abstract reports cumulative US implantation in 170,252 people, involving 240,056 devices, as of 2015.", "Utilization was approximately 12.7% among people meeting traditional audiometric criteria: severe-to-profound sensorineural loss in the better ear.", "Utilization was approximately 2.1% under expanded criteria including single-sided deafness or asymmetrical loss, with severe-to-profound loss in the worse ear.", "The authors state that the total population of untreated audiometric candidates continued to rise despite growth in the annual proportion receiving implants." ], "limitations": "Only the publisher abstract was accessible and archived; the full article, funding statement, underlying market report and research sample size could not be assessed. The population estimates concern 2015 and audiometric eligibility, not present-day clinical candidacy or venue attendance. Implant devices and implant recipients have different counts.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "ridc-2022-orr-help-points", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ridc-2022-orr-help-points/", "title": "Accessible Travel Policy Implementation: Review of unbooked assistance and Help Points", "authors": "Research Institute for Disabled Consumers (RiDC)", "publisher": "Office of Rail and Road", "date": "2022-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Field audit (mystery shopping for the rail regulator)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Government (commissioned by the Office of Rail and Road, Great Britain's rail regulator, from the Research Institute for Disabled Consumers, which ran the audits with its panel of disabled consumers; the report states that it is independent)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2022-07/accessible-travel-policy-implementation-review-july-2022.pdf", "summary": "Disabled auditors' mystery-shop visits to 147 railway stations in Great Britain, checking assistance, signs and Help Points, including whether the Help Point had a working hearing loop.", "findings": [ "The executive summary's Context section dates fieldwork from mid-February 2020, with a pandemic pause in early March, to completion in mid-November 2021 after a late-September restart (printed pages 3-4).", "63 auditors from RiDC's consumer panel, including four expert reviewers, carried out 147 audits at 68 staffed and 79 unstaffed or partially staffed stations across 21 train operators; fieldwork began in February 2020, paused for the pandemic and was completed after a restart in September 2021. In its profile of auditors, 18 (23%) had a hearing impairment and 84% a mobility impairment.", "Among 22 answers on whether the Help Point had a working hearing loop, 81.8% agreed and 18.2% disagreed (Appendix 2, Table L, printed page 77). The table does not establish that these were 22 distinct auditors; the study includes multiple audits per auditor.", "Among the reasons auditors gave for not using a Help Point, one wrote: \"I am hard of hearing and had difficulty hearing the reply\", and another could not hear properly because of background noise and the Help Point being out in the open.", "Only 41% of Help Points showed what to do if the Help Point did not work.", "82% of auditors heard departure or arrival announcements at staffed stations against 68% at unstaffed or partially staffed stations." ], "limitations": "The loop result rests on 22 answers and the report does not say how auditors judged that a loop was working (for example with a telecoil or a loop listener); there were no field-strength measurements. Help Points only, not ticket offices or trains, and the sample was weighted to mobility impairment. The report gives its own date as May 2022; ORR published it in July 2022.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "transport", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "ditrdc-2022-transport-standards-ris", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ditrdc-2022-transport-standards-ris/", "title": "Reforms of the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002: Stage 2 Consultation Regulation Impact Statement", "authors": "Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (Australia)", "publisher": "Australian Government (copy on the Office of Impact Analysis website)", "date": "2022-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Regulation impact statement (consultation)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://oia.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/posts/2022/04/Stage%202%20Consultation%20Regulation%20Impact%20Statement.pdf", "summary": "Australia's consultation on reforming its public transport accessibility rules, with a costed proposal for hearing augmentation on vehicles and a qualitative cost assessment for hearing loops at stations and stops.", "findings": [ "Proposes that hearing augmentation on buses, trains, trams and ferries meet AS 1428.5 (2021) and cover the whole vehicle, against the 10% of the enclosed area required under the 1992 standard the rules now cite, and puts the monetised compliance costs at A$1.6 million administrative and A$122.6 million substantive (real 2021/22 dollars, discounted at 7% over a 20-year implementation and 15-year appraisal period).", "For stations, stops and other transport premises, states that of the two systems the building rules recognise, magnetic induction and receivers issued by the operator, \"The logistics of issuing, collecting and cleaning receivers almost certainly precludes their use in a public transport system\", leaving the induction loop.", "Describes induction loops as a mature technology whose \"Material costs are low with labour usually being the main expense\", with the price varying with the area covered, and notes that operators extending coverage may need a new system rather than an extension, at sites with overhead wires in particular.", "Did not cost the premises reform in its cost-benefit analysis, describing it as a definitional change with no change to assets.", "Says extending hearing augmentation coverage may pose a challenge with associated costs at individual sites, particularly those with overhead wires (p. 98)." ], "limitations": "A consultation document: the costs are national estimates for the proposed rules, not prices from projects, and the vehicle figure is not broken down by technology or per vehicle. Its benefit-cost ratio is given only for the whole information and wayfinding theme, not for hearing augmentation alone. The cover gives March 2022; an addendum records amendments on 28 and 31 March 2022.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs", "transport" ] }, { "id": "listen-2022-la-438-neckloop", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2022-la-438-neckloop/", "title": "Advanced Neck Loop (Adult) (LA-438)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (product page)", "date": "2022-01-28", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the neckloop and of the RF, infrared, Wi-Fi and two-way receivers it is sold for)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/shop/product/la-438-neck-loop/", "summary": "Listen Technologies' page and specifications for its passive neckloop, which Pro Audito's 2026 bench test ranked second of six.", "findings": [ "Gives a frequency response of 20 Hz to 15 kHz (±3 dB re 1 kHz), an impedance of 3 to 6 ohms at 1 kHz, a maximum power input of 1 W, and an input sensitivity of \"380 mVrms @ 1 kHz produces 400 mA/m\".", "Lists IEC 62489-1:2010, CE and UKCA under standards, and claims an \"Industry leading magnetic field strength range\".", "Says the neckloop works with any telecoil-equipped hearing aid or cochlear implant and with any of the maker's receivers, and lists its RF (72 and 216 MHz), infrared, Wi-Fi and ListenTALK receivers as the devices needed with it; it has a safety breakaway connection and a compatibility switch." ], "limitations": "A maker's specifications without a stated measurement position or method, so they cannot be compared directly with the dummy-head measurements in Pro Audito's test. The date is the page's publication date in its metadata; it was last modified on 10 April 2025, and the page says specifications may change without notice.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "nfpa-2022-fire-alarm-basics", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nfpa-2022-fire-alarm-basics/", "title": "A Guide to Fire Alarm Basics", "authors": "National Fire Protection Association", "publisher": "National Fire Protection Association", "date": "2022-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Standards body guidance", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (National Fire Protection Association)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/project/storefront/catalog/files/code-or-topic-fact-sheets/FireAlarmBasicsFactSheet.pdf", "summary": "NFPA’s illustrated guide explains fire alarm power, fault reporting, occupant notification and testing of integrated systems, citing NFPA 72’s 2022 edition.", "findings": [ "Pages 5–6 describe primary and secondary power options. For the battery-backed arrangement, the guide gives 24 hours in standby followed by five minutes in alarm, or 15 minutes for emergency voice/alarm communication systems. Its generator arrangement uses batteries with four hours of standby capacity; its stored-energy arrangement references NFPA 111.", "Pages 6–7 describe notification-circuit integrity monitoring and a trouble condition when the supervisory voltage is lost. These descriptions concern the fire alarm circuit, not every connected audio network.", "Page 6 says the locally adopted building, fire or life-safety code determines which audible, visible and voice notification is required.", "Page 9 describes an input/output matrix recording which outputs follow each alarm input and says the fire alarm and integrated systems need to be tested together.", "The closing references cite NFPA 72, 2022 edition, and the footer dates the guide January 2022." ], "limitations": "An explanatory guide, not the full code or a current-edition clause audit. It gives no assessment of loops, Auracast or Wi-Fi listening systems. Its battery durations must not be presented as a universal prescription for an assistive listening installation. Page 7 appears to repeat public mode where private mode is intended in a sound-level comparison; that comparison is not used.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2022-tr-103-614", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2022-tr-103-614/", "title": "ETSI TR 103 614 V1.1.1: Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio spectrum Matters (ERM); Hearing Loop System (HLS) intended to assist the hearing impaired in the frequency range 0 Hz to 9 kHz; System Reference Document", "authors": "ETSI Technical Committee ERM", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2022-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Standards technical report (system reference document)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, the European telecommunications standards organisation, whose members include manufacturers; a system reference document that asks European spectrum regulators to keep 10 Hz to 9 kHz available for hearing loops, and that supports a radio-equipment standard it says the International Hearing Loop Manufacturers Association is drafting)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/103600_103699/103614/01.01.01_60/tr_103614v010101p.pdf", "summary": "A European standards report describing hearing loop systems for spectrum regulators: their field strength, how fast the field falls outside the loop, the standards that apply, the size of the market and its view of Bluetooth Low Energy as an alternative.", "findings": [ "Clause 3.1 defines a telecoil as a magnetic pickup coil, a hearing instrument as a hearing aid or cochlear implant, and a hearing loop listener as a portable receiver giving audible output from the loop signal. It defines a hearing aid as a worn personal amplification system and a cochlear implant as a device stimulating the auditory nerve through electrodes in the cochlea, allowing some people with severe hearing loss to perceive sound.", "Clause 3.1 defines a hearing loop system as signal sources and amplifiers creating magnetic fields through audio-frequency current in a loop or coil; a perimeter loop follows the coverage boundary horizontally, while a phased array uses overlapping loops with currents of different phase for more even coverage and less spill. It also defines a magnetic field strength meter and gives 400 mA/m as the 0 dB reference.", "Clauses 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 describe the loop driver supplying current and the magnetic field level at listening positions, including its variation with audio frequency. Clause 5.1.3 explains that the magnetic field extends beyond the intended coverage space and that counter and help-point loops serve a very local area.", "Clause 5.1.0 (printed p. 9) describes selecting a hearing instrument's T position or programme to receive a loop through its telecoil; it explains that the T input can be assigned to a user-selectable programme operated by a push-button. A physical T-labelled switch is therefore one possible control, rather than a requirement of the coupling method.", "Clause 5.1.0 (printed p. 9) also describes an amplifier producing audio-frequency current in the loop cable, and identifies counter and fixed help-point systems as small-area loops covering a localized space. These passages support the loop-driver and counter-loop definitions.", "Describes loops as purely magnetic, unmodulated audio-frequency systems working between 10 Hz and 9 kHz, and says no cases of radio interference from them have been reported.", "Says a loop meeting IEC 60118-4 has a frequency response within ±3 dB of 1 kHz from 100 Hz to 5 kHz, and a field that varies by no more than ±3 dB over a large area system or ±8 dB for a small area system such as a counter loop.", "Shows the vertical and horizontal field components moving away from a perimeter loop, notes that the vertical component, at right angles to the loop's plane, is the one most hearing aids use, and says the field usually falls to -30 dB (re 400 mA/m) at one loop width and -44 dB at twice that distance; field strengths below -40 dB are generally accepted to be inaudible to hearing instruments.", "Where even weak fields outside the room are unacceptable, such as for confidentiality, says low-spill amplifiers with pairs of phase-shifted loop arrays are used to cut the overspill sharply.", "Estimates UK sales at no fewer than 10,000 loop systems a year and the UK installed base at 50,000 to 200,000 systems.", "States in its executive summary (clause 5.1.0) that \"Emerging technologies such as Bluetooth® Low Energy do not offer a practical alternative to HLS in most cases due to practical problems such as latency, the need to pair, and short battery life\", and that even if these problems are solved, the very large installed base of hearing instruments with telecoils will benefit from hearing loop systems for many years.", "The small-area field figure is in clause 5.1.2. Reference [i.2] and clause 5.1.5.2 identify IEC 60118-4:2014 without citing Amendment 1 (2017); this report therefore does not establish what the amended small-volume acceptance clause says.", "Clause 5.1.1 explains that hearing loops have no carrier or modulation scheme and require a magnetic-field response of 100 Hz-5 kHz within ±3 dB of the 1 kHz response. It explicitly allows extension above 5 kHz within the report’s 9 kHz scope; 5 kHz is not described as a physical cutoff of every loop." ], "limitations": "A spectrum-planning document rather than a performance study: its spill figures come from one illustrative plot without stated loop size or measurement method, and its market figures are estimates without sources. Its statement on Bluetooth Low Energy gives no evidence and dates from January 2022 or earlier. It records that no comments were received at enquiry. The document shows January 2022 as its publication month.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "future-proofing", "service-counters", "loop-limits", "portable-and-counter-loops", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "hlaa-2021-loop-installation-practices", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hlaa-2021-loop-installation-practices/", "title": "Best Practices for Hearing Loop Installation", "authors": "Hearing Loss Association of America (contact: Juliëtte Sterkens, HLAA hearing loop advocate)", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America (Get in the Hearing Loop)", "date": "2021-10-28", "kind": "Advocacy guidance (installation checklist)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Hearing Loss Association of America, a US consumer organisation; guidance from its hearing loop programme)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/best-practices-for-hearing-loop-installation.pdf", "summary": "HLAA's two-page checklist for venues hiring a hearing loop installer and commissioning the loop.", "findings": [ "Page 1, under Qualifications, recommends asking for references and verifying experience in similar buildings. The preceding installer-selection paragraph says some states require additional licensing.", "Recommends an installer who has been \"trained and certified in International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard verification\", has technical support from the supplier and is legally allowed to install in the area.", "Lists what to require of the installer: on-site measurement before pricing, a loop that meets IEC 60118-4, a \"certificate of conformity\" to the standard, verification of performance by a hearing aid user familiar with loops, integration with the audio system, signage, staff training and \"periodic maintenance\", without saying how often.", "Names two companies that offer hearing loop training and certification: Contacta, Inc. and Williams Sound, both of which sell loop equipment.", "States that the IEC standard requires, as the final test, that a hearing aid user familiar with loops confirm on site, while the installer is present, that the signal is even and clear with minimal magnetic background noise. Staff can check that a loop is working but will not hear it as a telecoil or implant user does.", "Says a computer simulation cannot reveal magnetic background noise, so a loop should never be installed from a simulation alone, and that background noise should be investigated by a licensed electrician." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance with no data on installation quality. The statement about the standard's final test has not been checked here against the paywalled text, and the guidance sets no maintenance interval. A companion HLAA sheet by the managing director of Contacta Inc. is a separate record in this library.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "commissioning-tests", "loop-verification", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "places-of-worship", "installers-and-training", "procurement" ] }, { "id": "ietf-2021-rfc9119", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ietf-2021-rfc9119/", "title": "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless Media (RFC 9119)", "authors": "Perkins C, McBride M, Stanley D, Kumari W, Zúñiga JC", "publisher": "Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), RFC Editor", "date": "2021-10-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Standards body informational RFC", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (IETF; an Informational RFC that represents IETF consensus but is not a standard; the authors were with Lupin Lodge, Futurewei, HPE, Google and SIGFOX)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9119.html", "summary": "An IETF document on the known limits of multicast over Wi-Fi and the features and network choices that can improve it.", "findings": [ "Section 2 expands AP as IEEE 802.11 Access Point, and sections 3.1 and 4.3 describe its delivery of network traffic to wireless stations. Section 3.1.1 describes multicast as point-to-multipoint communication; section 3.2 discusses multicast DNS for service discovery. These are general network mechanisms, used here as shared-path evidence for venue Wi-Fi audio.", "Section 4.3 calls DTIM a Delivery Traffic Indication Message and says that an access point buffers multicast frames until the next DTIM beacon when an associated station uses power saving. Section 2 instead expands the same abbreviation as Delivery Traffic Indication Map; both passages describe buffered group traffic.", "Says multicast over wireless links \"is quite sensitive to the presence of background traffic\", worse than on wired networks (section 3.1.1).", "Explains that Wi-Fi multicast frames are not acknowledged, so the access point cannot tell when a resend is needed, and states that a packet loss rate of 5% or more is not uncommon.", "States that multicast is generally sent at the slowest rate of all connected devices (the basic rate), which can be more than a thousand times slower than the best unicast rate; slower transmissions occupy more airtime and reduce the network's overall capacity.", "Notes that when any connected device uses power-save mode, the access point holds all multicast frames until the next DTIM beacon, which delays multicast traffic.", "Describes converting multicast to unicast over the Wi-Fi link as a mitigation, because unicast frames are acknowledged and buffered for sleeping devices; it notes there is no standardised method yet, that the access point must then track which devices subscribe to which streams, and that the approach \"comes with the trade-off of sometimes sending the same packet multiple times over the Wi-Fi link\".", "Of the IEEE 802.11 features meant to help, it says Directed Multicast Service (DMS) \"is not currently implemented in products\" and that GroupCast with Retries (GCR) \"may introduce unacceptable latency\".", "Says unicast \"avoids most of the problems specific to multicast over Wi-Fi\" (section 4.6.1) and that \"there is not yet a standardized method\" for converting multicast to unicast (section 4.6.2)." ], "limitations": "A general technical document on Wi-Fi multicast, not about audio or assistive listening; it reports no measurements of its own, and the 5% loss figure is given without a study behind it. Wi-Fi equipment and standards have changed since October 2021.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "mckinley-2021", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/mckinley-2021/", "title": "Best Practices to Install a Hearing Loop System that Meets the IEC Standard", "authors": "McKinley R", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America (reprinted with permission)", "date": "2021-09-30", "kind": "Manufacturer article (reprinted by an advocacy group)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (written by Richard McKinley, managing director of Contacta Inc., a hearing loop maker that offers installer training and certification; reprinted by the Hearing Loss Association of America's hearing loop programme)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/best-practices-to-install-a-hearing-loop-system-that-meets-the-iec-standard.pdf", "summary": "A loop maker's managing director describes testing shortcuts that make a loop look as if it meets IEC 60118-4, and what correct testing involves, in the author's view.", "findings": [ "Says some installers measure at very few points, generally next to the loop wire or in a pre-tested seat, and that the signal should instead be measured while walking the whole looped area, including the point farthest from any wire.", "Describes a case in which a maker's representative read only the 1 kHz level at the centre of each loop as proof of frequency response, while an accurate measurement found the response more than 10 dB outside the ±3 dB tolerance; the author adds that measuring within a foot of the wire gives misleading readings.", "Says peak levels in poorly designed loops are often -10 to -15 dB instead of 0 dB ±3 dB, usually because of a perimeter loop or loop widths too far apart, which a more powerful amplifier rarely fixes.", "Gives -32 dB as the IEC limit for background noise but recommends -40 dB, because in the US loop receivers with headphones are also used, and asks that a person without hearing aids listen through a loop receiver before a system is proposed.", "Proposes either \"an independently trained and qualified group that certifies hearing loop systems\" or that manufacturers, which train installers, help with designs and sell the product, be liable for a working loop and regularly send teams to test their contractors' installations." ], "limitations": "One maker's experience, with anecdotes rather than counted data; the author's company sells loop equipment and installer training. The -40 dB preference is the author's own, and the IEC limit quoted has not been checked here against the paywalled standard. The date is the one printed on the reprint.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification" ] }, { "id": "standards-australia-2021-as-1428-5", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/standards-australia-2021-as-1428-5/", "title": "AS 1428.5:2021 Design for access and mobility, Part 5: Communication for people who are deaf or hearing impaired", "authors": "Standards Australia", "publisher": "Standards Australia (Standards Store)", "date": "2021-09-03", "kind": "Australian standard (public synopsis and table of contents)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Standards Australia)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://store.standards.org.au/product/as-1428-5-2021", "summary": "Australia's standard for the design, application and testing of assistive listening systems: hearing loops, radio and infrared receiver systems, coverage, receiver numbers and signage.", "findings": [ "The store's synopsis says the standard sets requirements for the design, application and testing of assistive listening systems for people who are deaf or have a hearing impairment. Published 3 September 2021, 65 pages, current, superseding AS 1428.5-2010.", "Its published table of contents covers hearing loop systems in detail (telecoil orientation and blind zones, coverage area, magnetic field strength, background noise, frequency response, distortion, test reports), with a separate section for systems at counters.", "Separate sections set specifications for modulated radio and infrared receiver systems (receivers, attachments, battery life, frequency response, distortion, signage, measurement and calibration), and a section covers sound field amplification.", "Under receiver system types, the contents list \"Public wi-fi system and mobile/cellular network\" and wireless technology connecting hearing devices to phones. An appendix has headings on why low latency is critical and \"Why mobile phones are not suitable as receivers\".", "An appendix covers hearing loop coverage, receiver system coverage and receiver quantities, coverage area and signage. The normative references include IEC 62489 on induction loop components.", "Its published table of contents includes signage clauses for loops (3.2.14), counters (3.3.13), radio (4.2.9) and infrared (5.2.9), a full section 7 on signage, and Annex A.7." ], "limitations": "Only the synopsis, table of contents and reference list are public; the requirements, numbers and the reasoning under each heading are in the paid text and are not summarised here. Where it applies depends on the Australian code or contract that calls it up, which this record does not establish. Its contents do not name Bluetooth broadcast or Auracast.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "rf-fm-bands", "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "ellisys-le-audio-capture", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ellisys-le-audio-capture/", "title": "Capture and Security Challenges Relating to the LE Isochronous Physical Channel: The Benefits of tZERO Tracking Technology", "authors": "Ellisys", "publisher": "Ellisys", "date": "2021-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer technical note", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ellisys, maker of Bluetooth protocol analysers)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.ellisys.com/technology/een_bt10.pdf", "summary": "Explains why capturing Bluetooth LE broadcast audio requires more than observing advertising packets, and promotes a proprietary capture method.", "findings": [ "Page 2 distinguishes broadcast isochronous streams (BIS), established using advertising packets, from connected streams. BIS receivers send no acknowledgements; the broadcast uses unconditional retransmissions.", "Page 2 describes LC3 Auto-Detect as an Ellisys feature for detecting and decoding LC3 traffic even without capturing its configuration parameters.", "Page 6 explains that an analyser must collect broadcast-group parameters from periodic advertising to capture BIS traffic. Software processing can miss initial packets while configuring capture; Ellisys claims its tZERO method tracks active BIS streams in real time without blind periods.", "Pages 4-6 describe additional requirements for capturing encrypted traffic. The note does not present an independently measured capture-success rate, radio-level calibration uncertainty or receiver audio-quality test." ], "limitations": "A September 2021 maker note about the LE Audio transport underlying Auracast, rather than a venue commissioning standard. Its claims of uninterrupted capture promote its own technology; there is no comparative capture-error dataset. Applies here to the shared broadcast transport, not a hearing-device listening trial.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "iec-63087-1-2021", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-63087-1-2021/", "title": "IEC 63087-1:2021 Assistive listening devices and systems for active assisted living - Part 1: General", "authors": "IEC TC 100", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "2021-08-26", "kind": "International standard (public catalogue)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/28388", "summary": "The first general IEC 63087 document, subsequently replaced by IEC 63087:2026.", "findings": [ "Edition 1.0 was published on 26 August 2021. The catalogue now identifies IEC 63087:2026 as its replacement.", "The abstract describes requirements and measurement methods for the electroacoustic performance of personal listening systems and provision of assistive listening in audio, video and multimedia equipment.", "Hearing aids and devices entirely worn on or in the ear that cannot be measured independently are excluded." ], "limitations": "Catalogue and abstract only; the paid requirements were not read. Included as the predecessor of the broader venue-system standard, without extending this library to personal listening products. The catalogue does not give a separate withdrawal date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "sennheiser-2021-hearing-loss-society", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sennheiser-2021-hearing-loss-society/", "title": "On the current situation of people with hearing loss in society", "authors": "Mros LS (Sennheiser)", "publisher": "Sennheiser newsroom", "date": "2021-07-20", "kind": "Manufacturer article (newsroom)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sennheiser, which sells the MobileConnect Wi-Fi assistive listening system the article promotes and has sold infrared systems)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://newsroom.sennheiser.com/on-the-current-situation-of-hearing-impaired-people-in-society", "summary": "A maker's newsroom article on hearing loss and inclusion that sets out its view of the limits of loops, infrared and FM and promotes its Wi-Fi streaming system.", "findings": [ "Calls induction loops, infrared and FM the three traditional methods and says all have serious limitations, \"starting with limited range\".", "States that \"Infrared systems take a lot of time and resources to implement and properly maintain the hardware\", that loop infrastructure needs expensive, labour-intensive installation and limits hardware to one seating area, and that FM signals are \"unsafe and can be easily interfered with\".", "Says special seating areas for people with hearing loss create social stigma, and that \"shared assistive listening devices pose a major hygiene and health risk\" in the COVID-19 era and after.", "Presents its MobileConnect system, which streams over Wi-Fi to listeners' own phones in place of rental devices, and notes that Bluetooth to hearing devices can add significant delay." ], "limitations": "Marketing by a maker of a competing Wi-Fi system; its statements about loops, infrared and FM give no data or references.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "infrared-limits", "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "sennheiser-2021-mobileconnect-ada", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sennheiser-2021-mobileconnect-ada/", "title": "MobileConnect ADA Compliancy Statement", "authors": "Sennheiser Streaming Technologies GmbH", "publisher": "Sennheiser", "date": "2021-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer position statement", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sennheiser, maker of the MobileConnect Wi-Fi system)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.sennheiser.com/globalassets/digizuite/41165-en-mobileconnect_ada_compliancy_statement.pdf", "summary": "A one-page Sennheiser statement on its MobileConnect Wi-Fi system and the assistive listening sections of the 2010 ADA Standards, with its advice on receivers and neckloops.", "findings": [ "Opens with the claim that \"Sennheiser MobileConnect is compliant to the 'Assistive Listening Systems' requirements\" of the 2010 ADA Standards (sections 219 and 706).", "Notes that the 2010 Standards name hard-wired systems and three wireless types (induction loop, infrared and FM), and proposes that systems streaming over Wi-Fi to smart devices form a new, fourth subclass it calls \"Digital Communication Systems\".", "Argues that such systems share the advantages of the three named types: unaffected by sunlight outdoors, unlike infrared; secure digital transmission where confidentiality matters, unlike FM; and no need to stay in a set area, unlike loops.", "States that one MobileConnect Station serves up to 100 connections at once, which it equates with the receivers required under section 219.3 for a room of up to 6,500 seats.", "Says venues must still provide receivers under Table 219.3, at least 25% of them (and no fewer than two) hearing-aid compatible, and recommends meeting this with venue phones that have the app preinstalled and Wi-Fi set up, plus neckloops (it names the Geemarc iLoop+) or wired headphones.", "Says installations in large or complex venues need a professional sound engineer, citing the advisory to section 706.1." ], "limitations": "The maker's own reading of the law, with no test data; it cites no ruling or guidance from the Department of Justice or the Access Board on Wi-Fi systems. The 100-connection figure is the maker's and is sized to the loan-receiver table, not to everyone who might listen on their own phone. June 2021 is printed above the title; no publication day is given. Sennheiser's MobileConnect product page still linked the same statement on 9 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "wifi-networks", "lifetime-costs", "neckloops", "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "folkeard-2021-bandwidth", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/folkeard-2021-bandwidth/", "title": "Detection, Speech Recognition, Loudness, and Preference Outcomes With a Direct Drive Hearing Aid: Effects of Bandwidth", "authors": "Folkeard P, Van Eeckhoutte M, Levy S, Dundas D, Abbasalipour P, Glista D, Agrawal S, Scollie S", "publisher": "Trends in Hearing 25:2331216521999139", "date": "2021-04-19", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (single-blind repeated measures)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Manufacturer (Earlens funded the direct study costs at the National Centre for Audiology; two authors were Earlens employees and one served on its audiology advisory board)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8060758/", "summary": "Tested full versus restricted bandwidth through fitted Earlens direct-drive hearing devices in 15 adults.", "findings": [ "Fifteen adult hearing aid users with symmetric sensorineural loss wore the devices for 4-15 weeks before outcome testing; full bandwidth provided measurable audibility to 10 kHz, compared with a restricted condition reducing gain above 5 kHz.", "Full bandwidth improved sentence reception in competing speech by 1.1 dB on average across spatial configurations and improved high-frequency consonant recognition and detection.", "Results, Loudness Ratings and Preference: full bandwidth produced a small but perceptible loudness increase. Eight of 15 participants preferred full bandwidth, six had no preference and one preferred restricted bandwidth.", "Real-world acclimatisation used only full bandwidth, which the authors note could influence preferences; preference tests used speech in quiet." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer-funded, small study of one direct-drive hearing device. Shared evidence on the audible bandwidth of a listening path; no venue transmitter or codec was tested. Full PMC text read through the Wayback Machine; supplementary files were not read.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2021-en-301-549-v3", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2021-en-301-549-v3/", "title": "EN 301 549 V3.2.1: Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services", "authors": "ETSI, CEN and CENELEC", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2021-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "European standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, CEN and CENELEC)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301500_301599/301549/03.02.01_60/en_301549v030201p.pdf", "summary": "A historical edition of the European ICT accessibility standard, including magnetic coupling for hearing technologies.", "findings": [ "The cover and document history identify publication in 2021-03.", "Clause 8.2.2.1 requires magnetic coupling and the T symbol for fixed-line devices with speech output normally held to the ear; the symbol is a requirement rather than a precondition.", "Clause 8.2.2.2 also addresses magnetic coupling in wireless communication devices with speech output normally held to the ear.", "The foreword gives adoption on 10 March 2021. The magnetic-coupling requirement above is also present in version 3.1.1, published in November 2019." ], "limitations": "Public full text downloaded; the foreword, publication history and hearing-related clauses were read. Applies to ICT equipment, including relevant venue equipment, rather than room-wide listening-system provision. Publication alone does not establish legal application or an Official Journal citation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "uscourts-2021-design-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/uscourts-2021-design-guide/", "title": "U.S. Courts Design Guide (revised 2021)", "authors": "Judicial Conference of the United States", "publisher": "United States Courts (uscourts.gov)", "date": "2021-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Court design standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (Judicial Conference of the United States, the policy-making body of the federal judiciary)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/u.s._courts_design_guide_2021.pdf", "summary": "The federal judiciary's requirements for designing and renovating US federal courthouses, including assistive listening, microphones and acoustic privacy in courtrooms and jury rooms.", "findings": [ "Requires that people who are deaf or hard of hearing be accommodated and that assistive listening systems be provided under the Architectural Barriers Act standards, and says accommodations beyond those requirements \"will likely be necessary\", such as a sound-reinforcement system or a sign language interpreter.", "For the jury assembly area, recommends permanently installed assistive listening controls and emitters integrated with the sound system, says an induction loop may be considered and should then be engineered with the technology infrastructure, and asks for a self-contained portable system for trial jury suites and other places without a sound system.", "For the grand jury hearing room, says a wireless infrared system \"provides the flexibility and privacy needed\", that windows call for caution to avoid interference with the infrared signal, and that the emitters must reach the whole room by line of sight. Grand jury suites should have no windows or, if they do, opaque shades.", "Says multitrack systems in the grand jury hearing room can be used for assisted listening, simultaneous translation and confidential recordings.", "Asks for microphones at the grand jury foreperson's station and the witness box, controlled by the court reporter, a microphone for any interpreter connected to the room's amplification and recording system, and one at the U.S. attorney station or lectern.", "Names speech intelligibility and acoustic privacy as the two key acoustic factors in a courthouse, says good sound-system design cannot make up for poor room acoustics, and asks sound enhancement systems in courtrooms and jury rooms to give a Speech Transmission Index of at least 0.75.", "Classes courtrooms, trial jury suites and grand jury hearing rooms as confidential spaces for acoustic privacy, with localized sound masking in the public space next to jury rooms." ], "limitations": "Applies to federal courthouses. It names infrared but sets no performance figures for assistive listening systems and does not mention Bluetooth or Auracast; the detailed audiovisual requirements are in a separate Courtroom Technology Audiovisual Infrastructure Manual, which was not read. Revised March 2021.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "chodosh-2021-hear-va", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/chodosh-2021-hear-va/", "title": "The HEAR-VA Pilot Study: hearing assistance provided to older adults in the emergency department", "authors": "Chodosh J, Goldfeld K, Weinstein BE, Radcliffe K, Burlingame M, Dickson V, Grudzen C, Sherman S, Smilowitz J, Blustein J", "publisher": "Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 69(4):1071-1078", "date": "2021-02-11", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (randomised controlled pilot)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (VA New York Harbor Healthcare System, NYU Grossman School of Medicine and the City University of New York; funding is not stated in the abstract read)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://agsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jgs.17037", "summary": "A randomised pilot in a veterans' emergency department in which half of 133 older patients with hearing difficulty were lent a personal amplifier for their visit.", "findings": [ "133 veterans aged 60 and over (98.3% male, mean age 76.4) attending the emergency department of the Manhattan VA Medical Center, likely to be discharged home, who said they had difficulty hearing or scored 10 or more on the Hearing Handicap Inventory-Survey, were randomised 1:1; the intervention group received a personal amplifier (Williams Sound Pocketalker 2.0) to use during the visit.", "Across all items of a six-item hearing and understanding questionnaire, the intervention group reported a better experience: 75% agreed or strongly agreed that they understood what was said without effort, against 56% of controls, and 75% against 36% said clinicians gave them an explanation of their presenting problems.", "3% of the intervention group had an emergency department revisit within 3 days, against 9.0% of controls.", "The authors conclude that personal amplifiers may be an important adjunct to emergency care for older patients but need validation in a larger, more definitive randomised trial." ], "limitations": "Read from the abstract only (on PubMed); the full text is paywalled, so methods, statistical tests and confidence intervals were not checked. A small single-site pilot among veterans, almost all men; outcomes were self-reported and the comparison was with no device. The date is the online publication; the issue is April 2021.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "nti-audio-2021-afils-app-note", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nti-audio-2021-afils-app-note/", "title": "Application Note: Induction Loop Systems with XL2 Analyzer (AFILS)", "authors": "Norman DI (for NTi Audio)", "publisher": "NTi Audio", "date": "2021-01-12", "kind": "Manufacturer application note", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (NTi Audio, which sells the analyzer and signal generator the note is written for; the author, David Ian Norman, is described in the note as a member of the IEC committee for these systems)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.nti-audio.com/wp-content/uploads/NTi-Audio-AppNote-AFILS-with-XL2.pdf", "summary": "A measuring-instrument maker's step-by-step method for commissioning and verifying a hearing loop against IEC 60118-4.", "findings": [ "Gives the requirements, all referred to 400 mA/m: average field strength -12 dB ±3 dB (100 mA/m), maximum field strength 0 dB (400 mA/m), frequency response from 100 to 5,000 Hz within ±3 dB, and background noise of -22 dB A-weighted, all for the vertical component of the field.", "Defines the covered area as the area where all the requirements are met, measured at randomly distributed points at 1.2 m in seating areas and 1.7 m in standing areas, with exceptions where listeners' heads are not upright, as in places of worship and hospitals.", "Measures background noise with the loop off before the loop is planned: ideally at least 22 dB, and best more than 47 dB, below the reference level, repeated with floor heating and lighting on and off and with dimmers at several settings; noise with a marked tonal quality should be below -47 dB. With the loop on and no input, noise should rise by no more than 3 dB.", "Measures the maximum field strength with a 1 kHz sine at representative positions (0 dB, varying no more than ±3 dB) and the frequency response with band-limited pink noise at several positions.", "Says the standard sets no limit for crosstalk between neighbouring loops, and that -40 dB at 1 kHz has been found acceptable, or -48 dB in critical cases such as cinemas.", "Ends with a system check by a small number of hearing aid users, with talkers and other sources in their normal positions, and asks for a plan beside the loop sign marking where all requirements are met.", "Page 3 specifies an XL2 analyser, signal generator and calibrated loop receiver with flat response, such as the CMR3; its specified interface is 0 dBu RMS for 400 mA/m. Pages 4-5 require the intended listening height and vertical magnetic-field component." ], "limitations": "A maker's note written around its own instruments, with no data on how often loops pass. Its clause numbers do not match the contents of the 2014 edition, and its -22 dB noise figure differs from the -32 dB other guides give; none of its figures has been checked here against the paywalled standard.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "commissioning-tests", "loop-verification", "places-of-worship", "neckloops", "theatres-and-cinemas", "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "cen-2021-en-17210", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cen-2021-en-17210/", "title": "EN 17210:2021 Accessibility and usability of the built environment - Functional requirements", "authors": "CEN-CENELEC Joint Technical Committee 11", "publisher": "CEN and CENELEC; public preview from SIST", "date": "2021-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "European standard (public preview)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (CEN and CENELEC; SIST is the Slovenian national standards body)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://preview.sist.si/sist-preview/65077/400f686d60104137b0fd4196277dca0b/SIST-EN-17210-2021.pdf", "summary": "The European built-environment standard places hearing enhancement within its functional accessibility requirements.", "findings": [ "The European title page gives January 2021 as its issue month and approval by CEN on 30 November 2020. The Slovenian national cover is dated 1 March 2021; these are different milestones.", "The contents list clause 6.5, Audible information and hearing enhancement.", "Definition 3.30 describes hearing enhancement in terms of equipment, systems or services that improve listening capabilities." ], "limitations": "SIST public preview only; clause 6.5 itself is outside the preview. No numerical targets, required venue types or legal application are inferred. National publication dates must not be substituted for the European issue month.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "church-of-england-2021-equal-access", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/church-of-england-2021-equal-access/", "title": "Equal Access to Church Buildings", "authors": "Church Buildings Council (Church of England); theological material by the Revd Bill Braviner", "publisher": "Church of England (ChurchCare)", "date": "2021-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Guidance (denominational, for parochial church councils)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (the Church of England's Church Buildings Council, advising its own parishes; copyright Archbishops' Council; the theological material was drafted by a Council member who is a trustee of the charity Disability and Jesus)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2025-08/equal_access_to_church_buildings_v7.pdf", "summary": "The Church of England's guidance to parishes on access for disabled people under the Equality Act 2010, including the permissions needed to alter a church and the consistent use of a loop and microphones.", "findings": [ "Says the Equality Act 2010 continues the duty of reasonable adjustments from the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, and that what is reasonable varies: large-print hymn books may be expected, a lift up the tower of a small village church may not. Its web page lists induction loops among the aids a church may need to provide.", "Asks parishes to begin with an access audit, ideally produced with disabled parishioners, and to keep a plan, possibly over several years, that records for each possible improvement whether it is reasonable and why.", "On consistency: where there is \"a loop system to work with hearing aids, make sure it works and then use it consistently\", which means everyone who leads or speaks uses a microphone \"even if the speaker may not feel that they need to\", and for some styles of worship a roving microphone as well as fixed ones.", "Says checking that the PA is helping all worshippers, and maintenance and repair, can usually be done without permission, while works that change the building need a faculty, with consultation through the Diocesan Advisory Committee and, for listed churches, possibly Historic England and amenity societies; it adds that the faculty system gives more weight to a church's worship and mission than secular listed building consent does.", "Encourages parishes to state their access provisions, such as loops, on their web presence, including the A Church Near You directory, and gives a Grade I listed medieval church that added a hearing loop among other access works as an example." ], "limitations": "Guidance on physical access in general: it gives no technical advice on loops or other systems, names no performance standard and does not mention Auracast, infrared or radio systems. The cover is dated 2021; the file linked from the guidance page is version 7, created on 1 August 2025.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2021-loop-certification", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2021-loop-certification/", "title": "Induction Loop Certification", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV", "date": "2021-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer commissioning form (FRM 720D)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, for commissioning its loop amplifiers using its PC Mixer App)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/frm_720_loop_certification_SIMP_2021.pdf", "summary": "A loop maker’s blank commissioning form records readings at seven positions and asks the facility manager to listen and sign at handover.", "findings": [ "Testing starts with normal venue electrical equipment and lighting running and the loop amplifier off; background magnetic noise is measured A-weighted relative to 400 mA/m.", "Noise at or below -32 dB passes the initial check; between -32 and -20 dB the form calls for investigation and informing the facility manager, and above -20 dB it strongly recommends correcting the source before commissioning.", "The 1 kHz field-strength step specifies 400 mA/m ±3 dB at the centre and six typical listening positions, marked on a retained floor plan, at seated or standing hearing height; it also asks whether the largest minus smallest reading is 6 dB or less.", "The frequency-response table records 100 Hz, 500 Hz, 1 kHz, 2.5 kHz and 5 kHz at the same seven positions. The step’s introductory question names only 100 Hz, 1 kHz and 5 kHz.", "Final handover asks the facility manager to check sound quality with a loop receiver and acknowledge that moving the app’s output faders changes calibration; both the field technician and facility manager sign." ], "limitations": "A blank manufacturer form, not measurements from an installation or the IEC standard itself. It names no IEC edition. Its frequency-response step says hearing height is 5 feet, whereas the preceding step distinguishes seated and standing positions; its table includes more frequencies than its introductory question. Date is the printed 2021 copyright year, not the upload-directory date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification" ] }, { "id": "frazier-2020", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/frazier-2020/", "title": "What's Going On? More Loops and Fewer Telecoils", "authors": "Frazier SO", "publisher": "Hearing Review", "date": "2020-09-28", "kind": "Trade magazine article (advocate author)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (written by Stephen O. Frazier, a freelance writer who heads the Loop New Mexico campaign and was a founding member of HLAA's Get in the Hearing Loop initiative; published in the trade magazine Hearing Review)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://hearingreview.com/hearing-products/accessories/assistive-technologies/whats-going-on-more-loops-and-fewer-telecoils", "summary": "An advocate's count, from the Consumer's Guide to Hearing Aids, of how many hearing aid models offered a telecoil in 2017 and in 2020, brand by brand.", "findings": [ "Leaving out completely-in-the-canal (invisible) models, the number of models large enough for a telecoil fell from 349 in the 2017 Consumer's Guide to Hearing Aids to 235 in the 2020 guide, and the number offering a telecoil fell from 291 to 176, a drop of 40%. The share went from 83% to 75%.", "Counting invisible models too, the share of all listed models that could take a telecoil fell from 71% in 2017 to 58% in 2020 (176 of 302 models).", "Brands differed widely: in 2020, 11 brands offered a telecoil on every model that could hold one, while others ranged from 17% to 85%. Rexton went from 20 of 20 models in 2017 to 13 of 28; Signia's share fell from 82% to 53% as new models were added.", "Reports that the guide excludes Costco, Sam's Club and some direct sellers, and quotes WS Audiology calling Rexton's drop temporary and Starkey stating its commitment to telecoils.", "Says nine US states then required clients to be told about telecoils before a fitting, while reporting that some providers still tell clients Bluetooth makes a telecoil unnecessary.", "Quotes WS Audiology (Andrew Arnold): \"There has been a temporary dip in the number of Rexton hearing aids equipped with telecoil for a couple of reasons.\"", "Quotes Starkey (Dave Fabry): \"We remain strongly committed to providing telecoil solutions for our latest custom, behind-the-ear (BTE), and receiver-in the-canal (RIC) products.\"" ], "limitations": "Counts models listed in a guide that makers join voluntarily, not hearing aids sold or in use. The author is a loop advocate, and the manufacturer quotes and the reports about providers are the author's, without data. The figures are from 2017 and 2020.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "listener-reach", "telecoil-fitting", "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "hearing-ambassadors-frontline-loop-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hearing-ambassadors-frontline-loop-guide/", "title": "In the Loop, Part 2: Hearing loop awareness for frontline staff and managers", "authors": "Bury U3A Accessibility Study Group and Communic8te Bury", "publisher": "Bury U3A and Communic8te Bury; copy hosted by Hearing Ambassadors", "date": "2020-08-25", "kind": "Community advocacy guide and self-assessment toolkit", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Bury U3A and Communic8te Bury volunteer groups; acknowledges professional guidance from Ideas for Ears, NHS Audiology, Ampetronic and Contacta; funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingambassadors.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Part-2-Hearing-Loop-Awareness-for-Front-Line-Staff.pdf", "summary": "A staff and manager guide with checklists for listening quality, user feedback, recurring problems, testing logs and ongoing maintenance.", "findings": [ "Recommends a named person familiar with the system, responsible for maintenance logs and able to arrange or recommend repairs; proposes at least weekly staff checks with a loop listener and annual specialist maintenance (printed page 19).", "Recommends annual or more frequent assessment by three or more hearing aid users, and signs inviting reports of problems. Explains that a staff loop listener can reveal a fault without reproducing exactly what a hearing aid user hears (printed pages 19-20).", "Asks for fixed loops to be on before business starts, portable loops to be charged overnight, and a person responsible for morning checks (printed page 20).", "Asks managers to include new and temporary staff in training and make the chain of responsibility clear (printed pages 21 and 27).", "User assessment covers clarity, volume, consistency across a room, positioning at a counter, access to portable equipment, signs, microphone location and staff knowledge (printed page 24).", "The user-testing log records the date, whether a hearing aid user or loop listener checked, whether the result was satisfactory and the action needed or taken. A separate maintenance log adds who checked; the annual-service checklist asks about user testing after specialist checks (printed pages 25-27).", "The recurring-problems checklist asks staff to acknowledge a complaint, try to reproduce the fault with a loop listener, invite other hearing aid users to check, and seek a technician when a fault is found (printed page 23)." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance, with no measured effect of its proposed schedules or user-panel size. Legal and technical generalisations are not independently verified here. Its suggestion that a complaint can be closed when other testers hear adequately does not rule out an intermittent or device-specific problem and is not adopted here. The cover states updated 25 August 2020; the hosting path is from 2021.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "van-eeckhoutte-2020-bandwidth", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/van-eeckhoutte-2020-bandwidth/", "title": "Speech recognition, loudness, and preference with extended bandwidth hearing aids for adult hearing aid users", "authors": "Van Eeckhoutte M, Folkeard P, Glista D, Scollie S", "publisher": "International Journal of Audiology (Taylor & Francis)", "date": "2020-04-20", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (publisher abstract)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Western University; Ontario Research Fund RE08-072; Signia provided hearing aids; the university receives licensing revenue for the DSL fitting software, returned to research)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14992027.2020.1750718", "summary": "Compared extended and restricted bandwidth in fitted hearing aids for 24 adults with high-frequency hearing loss.", "findings": [ "Twenty-four participants with mild-to-moderately-severe sloping sensorineural hearing loss used DSL v5.0 fittings with maximum available bandwidth or reduced gain above 4.5 kHz.", "Extended bandwidth yielded an average maximum audible output frequency of 7.5 kHz for a 65 dB SPL input; the abstract reports a 4.1% consonant discrimination improvement, attributed to /s/, /z/ and /t/.", "No significant change in loudness perception or preferred listening level was found. Forty-six percent preferred extended bandwidth and 33% had no preference." ], "limitations": "Only the publisher abstract, author information, acknowledgments and funding statement were readable, through a Wayback Machine copy. The full paper and detailed methods were not read. Hearing-aid bandwidth evidence, not a venue-system or codec comparison.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "fcc-15-247", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/fcc-15-247/", "title": "47 CFR 15.247: operation within the bands 902-928 MHz, 2400-2483.5 MHz, and 5725-5850 MHz", "authors": "US Federal Communications Commission", "publisher": "Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR)", "date": "2020-04-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Federal Communications Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/section-15.247", "summary": "US power limits for frequency-hopping and digitally modulated transmitters in the 902-928 MHz and 2.4 GHz bands, among others.", "findings": [ "Digitally modulated systems in 2400-2483.5 MHz need a 6 dB bandwidth of at least 500 kHz and may use up to 1 W maximum peak conducted output power.", "The 1 W limit assumes antennas with directional gain of no more than 6 dBi.", "Power spectral density conducted to the antenna may not exceed 8 dBm in any 3 kHz band.", "Digitally modulated systems in 902-928 MHz fall under the same rules: a 6 dB bandwidth of at least 500 kHz, up to 1 W maximum peak conducted output power and no more than 8 dBm in any 3 kHz band.", "Frequency-hopping systems in 902-928 MHz must use at least 50 hopping frequencies, each occupied no more than 0.4 s in any 20 s, when the hopping channel's 20 dB bandwidth is under 250 kHz, or at least 25 (0.4 s in any 10 s) for channels of 250 kHz up to the 500 kHz maximum. They may use up to 1 W with at least 50 hopping channels and 0.25 W with 25 to 49." ], "limitations": "A legal maximum only; it names no device type and says nothing about the power a given Auracast or digital RF product uses. The 5725-5850 MHz rules are not summarised here. Date is the section's latest amendment shown by eCFR (published 1 April 2020, in force from 1 June 2020); text read as current to October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "doj-2020-effective-communication", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2020-effective-communication/", "title": "ADA Requirements: Effective Communication", "authors": "US Department of Justice", "publisher": "US Department of Justice (ADA.gov)", "date": "2020-02-28", "kind": "Government guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ada.gov/resources/effective-communication/", "summary": "US guidance explains effective communication under ADA Titles II and III, including assistive listening and museum tours.", "findings": [ "Says covered state and local governments, businesses and nonprofit organisations serving the public must provide auxiliary aids and services when needed for effective communication.", "Lists assistive listening systems and devices among the available aids and services, and uses a museum or historic-house tour as an example where a printed script of a stock speech may be provided.", "The appropriate aid depends on the nature, length, complexity and context of the communication and the person’s usual communication method.", "Title II entities must give primary consideration to the person’s requested aid, subject to the stated exceptions; Title III entities are encouraged to consult the person.", "Explains undue-burden and fundamental-alteration limits and the obligation to provide another effective aid, if possible, when a particular aid would impose an undue burden. Recommends continuing staff training.", "The page gives an original issue date of 1 January 2014 and an update date of 28 February 2020; this record uses the update date." ], "limitations": "Informal explanatory guidance, not a new binding rule or a finding about a specific attraction. It does not specify a single system for every tour; applicability and exceptions depend on the covered entity and circumstances.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "tfl-2020-taxi-loop-guidelines", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/tfl-2020-taxi-loop-guidelines/", "title": "Guidelines for Induction Loop Hearing Systems installed in licensed London Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles (PHVs) (Vehicle Policy V1)", "authors": "Transport for London, London Taxi and Private Hire", "publisher": "Transport for London (published with its reply to freedom of information request FOI-0992-2122)", "date": "2020-02-26", "kind": "Regulatory guidance (taxi licensing requirements)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Transport for London, the licensing authority for London taxis and private hire vehicles)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://foi.tfl.gov.uk/FOI-0992-2122/guidelines-for-induction-loop-hearing-systems.pdf", "summary": "Transport for London's requirements for the induction loops that every licensed London taxi must have, with a performance standard, a test at every seat and a certificate form.", "findings": [ "States that all taxis licensed by TfL must have an approved induction loop hearing system, that the driver's microphone for talking with telecoil users must be active whenever the vehicle operates as a London taxi and be placed as close as possible to the talking position, and that signs must show that a loop is installed.", "Gives the reasons: hearing aid users struggle when ambient noise is high, as in a moving vehicle, and when a screen separates driver and passenger, which it calls \"an inherent feature of London style taxis\". It adds that vehicles complicate assistive listening through electromagnetic compatibility, magnetic interference from other equipment and vehicle components, vibration, temperature changes and metal in the structure.", "Requires installed systems to meet IEC 60118-4:2014+AMD1:2017 and test and record data according to BS EN 62489-1, and asks taxi manufacturers for test results, a certificate of conformity, a wiring diagram, field-strength coverage diagrams and background-noise readings.", "Says testing should be taken and recorded at all seating positions. Its certificate form rates magnetic background noise (all readings below -32 dB(A) as the best band), field strength at 1 kHz (0 dB ±6 dB), frequency response at 100 Hz and 5 kHz (within ±3 dB of 1 kHz), a listening test for hum, distortion and clarity, and live-speech peaks, and grades the result as pass, limited pass or fail.", "Says TfL may test loops at the annual licensing inspection or at other times, and that a taxi found not to follow the guidelines may not be licensed or may have its licence suspended.", "Does not mention Bluetooth, Auracast or other systems.", "Section 3.2 names BS EN 62489-1:2010+A2:2018 for testing and recording. Section 4.2 says testing should be taken and recorded at all seating positions. Section 2.6 requires nationally accepted signs or notices in agreed locations within the taxi indicating that a loop is installed and available." ], "limitations": "Version 1 of a TfL policy document, published with a TfL reply to a freedom of information request; whether a later version exists was not checked. It sets requirements and a test form but reports no test results, failure rates or passenger feedback. The general requirement names taxis; private hire vehicles appear in the title and the testing clauses.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "picou-2020", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/picou-2020/", "title": "MarkeTrak 10 (MT10) Survey Results Demonstrate High Satisfaction with and Benefits from Hearing Aids", "authors": "Picou EM", "publisher": "Seminars in Hearing 41(1):21-36 (Thieme)", "date": "2020-02-10", "kind": "Paper (journal article analysing an industry consumer survey)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Trade body (MarkeTrak is commissioned by the Hearing Industries Association, the US hearing aid industry's association; the author, of Vanderbilt University Medical Center, declares research funding from Sonova, GN ReSound and Signia as well as the National Institutes of Health)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7010487/", "summary": "Results from the 2018 MarkeTrak 10 survey of US adults with hearing loss, including which features their hearing aids have and how many own smartphones.", "findings": [ "Figure 7 compares satisfaction by feature ownership without printing telecoil-group counts. The 702-person base in Current Usage and Table 1 describes recent owners and should not be assigned as a verified denominator to the Figure 7 comparison.", "Of hearing aid owners who got their aids in the past five years (n=702), 20% said their hearing aids have a telecoil, 54% said they do not and 26% were not sure.", "Among all respondents with hearing loss, 86% have a cell phone and 78% of those phones are smartphones; smartphone ownership was above 80% for respondents younger than 75.", "54% of owners said their hearing aids have some wireless capability, but only 13% could stream directly from an iPhone; the author notes Android streaming was not yet available at the time of the survey.", "Owners with a telecoil, directional microphones, a smartphone app, Bluetooth devices or wireless hearing aids reported higher satisfaction than owners without those features.", "The author links continued difficulty on cell phones partly to low telecoil use and low streaming use, and finds about 1 in 5 owners unsure whether their aids have less visible features.", "The companion methods article cited as reference 43 (Powers and Rogin, MarkeTrak 10: History and Methodology, DOI 10.1055/s-0040-1701241) identifies the Hearing Industries Association as the organisation behind the survey series and AZ Marketing Research as its research collaborator. In Picou, Current Usage limits the feature results to owners who acquired aids within five years, and Table 1 gives this group as 702.", "The Technology section reports cellphone ownership and smartphone shares among respondents with hearing loss, but does not state the denominator for those phone questions; the 702-person base belongs to recent hearing-aid owners, not to the phone figures." ], "limitations": "Self-reported: many owners did not know their aids' features, so the telecoil figure measures awareness rather than what is fitted. The survey does not ask about venue assistive listening systems or hearing loops. Data were collected in 2018, before Auracast and before over-the-counter hearing aids. MarkeTrak 10 sent a screening survey to over 20,000 US households balanced to census characteristics (3,132 people with hearing loss answered the detailed part, 969 of them hearing aid owners); its methods are described in a companion article by HIA authors.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "listener-reach", "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2020-wavecast8-release", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2020-wavecast8-release/", "title": "NEW: Williams AV Releases WaveCAST 8 Multichannel Wi-Fi Assistive Listening Platform", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV (press release)", "date": "2020-02-04", "kind": "Manufacturer press release", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, maker of the WaveCAST Wi-Fi system described, which also sells FM, infrared, hearing loop and Auracast assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/new-williams-av-releases-wavecast-8-multichannel-wi-fi-assistive-listening-platform/", "summary": "A maker's announcement of WaveCAST 8, a multichannel system that streams venue audio over Wi-Fi to listeners' phones and tablets, with its claim about the ADA.", "findings": [ "Announces WaveCAST 8, a unit for larger assistive listening applications needing up to 32 channels, streaming audio over Wi-Fi to smartphones and tablets.", "States that \"The WaveCAST Series is the first-ever ADA compliant Wi-Fi assisted listening system\", for users who prefer not to install the listening app on their own devices or who want \"dedicated receivers available through ADA compliance\".", "Says up to four WaveCAST 8 units on one Wi-Fi network can provide several listening channels, supporting \"up to 1500+ users in multicast mode\", with listeners choosing channel and volume in an iOS or Android app." ], "limitations": "A press release with no test data. It cites no ruling or guidance from the Department of Justice or the Access Board and does not say which requirements its ADA claim rests on. The user figure is the maker's, given without test conditions. Last modified 11 April 2023 according to the page's metadata.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "iscve-2020-loop-assessment-scheme", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iscve-2020-loop-assessment-scheme/", "title": "Hearing Loop Assessment Scheme", "authors": "ISCVE (Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers)", "publisher": "Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers (UK)", "date": "2020-01-14", "kind": "Program page (installer assessment scheme)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers, a UK membership body for engineers in the sound, communications and visual systems industry, which runs the scheme and its hearing loop training courses)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://iscve.org.uk/hearing-loop-assessment-scheme/", "summary": "A UK institute's register of members it accepts as competent to test and assess hearing loops.", "findings": [ "Describes the scheme as offering organisations \"a source of competent individuals and companies who can test and assess hearing loops for correct operation and performance\".", "The entry paragraph names passing at least one ISCVE hearing loop course, evidence of three recent successful installations confirmed by clients, and specified BSI or IEC committee service. Its punctuation does not clearly establish whether course success and installation references are jointly required before the committee-service alternative.", "States that \"Many surveys reveal that hearing loop systems are sometimes badly installed or maintained\", without naming the surveys.", "Calls a correctly installed and operational loop a legal requirement under the Equality Act.", "The eligibility paragraph names passing a hearing loop training course among its routes; it does not describe a separate test for admission to the register or establish that assessors never take a test." ], "limitations": "A scheme page with no data. It names no surveys, does not say what a registered assessor measures or how often loops should be re-assessed, and supplies no detailed practical examination rubric or comparative installation outcomes. The relationship between the listed entry criteria is ambiguous; they should not be read as three clearly separate admission routes. Published on 14 January 2020 and last updated on 4 July 2022.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification", "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "nidcd-assistive-devices", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nidcd-assistive-devices/", "title": "Assistive Devices for People with Hearing, Voice, Speech, or Language Disorders", "authors": "National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders", "publisher": "NIDCD, US National Institutes of Health", "date": "2019-11-12", "kind": "Government consumer guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (NIDCD, US National Institutes of Health)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/assistive-devices-people-hearing-voice-speech-or-language-disorders", "summary": "Government guidance explaining how venue listening systems can serve people with or without hearing aids or cochlear implants.", "findings": [ "The introduction under What types of assistive listening devices are available? lists hearing loops, FM and infrared for large facilities, and says these systems can be used with or without hearing aids or implants.", "Under Hearing loop systems and in the telecoil sidebar, the page describes electromagnetic reception through a telecoil or loop receiver. A portable loop receiver with a headset gives access without a telecoil-equipped hearing device. The sidebar distinguishes this from the individually adjusted sound delivered through a person's hearing aid or cochlear implant.", "Under FM systems and Infrared systems, the page describes radio and light transmission respectively to a worn receiver; an additional neckloop or silhouette inductor provides telecoil coupling. The infrared paragraph says reception can be disrupted by competing light sources and cannot pass through walls.", "In the hearing-loop explanation and the telecoil sidebar, NIDCD says direct reception reduces competing background noise; loop receivers with headsets offer similar benefits without sound adjusted to the individual hearing-loss pattern.", "Under FM systems, the page says radio can penetrate walls, so listeners in neighbouring rooms may need different channels to avoid mixed signals.", "Under Hearing loop systems, listeners must be within or near the loop and wear a loop receiver or a hearing aid or cochlear implant with a telecoil serving as the receiver. Portable loop receivers are available for people whose hearing aids lack a telecoil." ], "limitations": "General guidance, with no comparative trial or quantified headset benefit. The date is the displayed last update; the publication number and footer also identify a December 2011 fact sheet. Personal amplifiers and communication aids elsewhere on the page are outside this question's venue scope.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "room-acoustics", "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2019-en-301-549-v3", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2019-en-301-549-v3/", "title": "EN 301 549 V3.1.1: Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services", "authors": "ETSI, CEN and CENELEC", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2019-11-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "European standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, CEN and CENELEC)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301500_301599/301549/03.01.01_60/en_301549v030101p.pdf", "summary": "A historical edition of the European ICT accessibility standard, including magnetic coupling for hearing technologies.", "findings": [ "The cover and document history identify publication in 2019-11.", "Clause 8.2.2.1 requires magnetic coupling and the T symbol for fixed-line devices with speech output normally held to the ear; the symbol is a requirement rather than a precondition.", "Clause 8.2.2.2 also addresses magnetic coupling in wireless communication devices with speech output normally held to the ear.", "The foreword gives adoption on 17 September 2019. Compared with the 2018 edition, clause 8.2.2.1 no longer restricts its coupling duty to devices already carrying the T symbol." ], "limitations": "Public full text downloaded; the foreword, publication history and hearing-related clauses were read. Applies to ICT equipment, including relevant venue equipment, rather than room-wide listening-system provision. Publication alone does not establish legal application or an Official Journal citation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "statcan-2019-unperceived-hearing-loss", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/statcan-2019-unperceived-hearing-loss/", "title": "Unperceived hearing loss among Canadians aged 40 to 79", "authors": "Ramage-Morin PL, Banks R, Pineault D, Atrach M", "publisher": "Statistics Canada, Health Reports", "date": "2019-08-21", "kind": "Paper (government survey analysis)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Government (Statistics Canada publication using the Canadian Health Measures Survey)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82-003-x/2019008/article/00002-eng.htm", "summary": "A national analysis shows a large gap between high-frequency hearing loss measured in a booth and self-reported hearing impairment, hearing aid ownership or a previous diagnosis.", "findings": [ "Combines 2012-2013 and 2014-2015 Canadian Health Measures Survey cycles: 3,964 respondents aged 40-79 with valid results for both ears, representing 15.2 million people. Combined household and examination response rate was 52.7%.", "Defines measured loss as a pure-tone average greater than 25 dB in the worse ear over 3, 4, 6 and 8 kHz. By this high-frequency definition, 54% had at least mild loss.", "Among people with measured high-frequency hearing loss, 77% had unperceived loss: no self-reported hearing impairment, no hearing aid ownership and no previous diagnosis of a hearing problem.", "Unperceived loss was present in 93% of those with mild measured high-frequency loss and 65% with moderate-to-profound measured high-frequency loss.", "The Strengths and limitations section says the functional-hearing questions were not designed as a proxy for measured loss. The unperceived-loss group may include people aware of diminished hearing who report no difficulty, as well as people unaware of their loss.", "The authors describe the possibility that gradual changes go unnoticed as people and their communication partners adapt." ], "limitations": "High-frequency hearing thresholds do not directly measure listening difficulty or benefit at a venue. The 77% denominator is people with measured loss, not all Canadians or all audience members. Excludes institutions, territories, reserves and certain other groups; people over 79 were outside the survey. Self-report depends on the questions asked; the unperceived-loss classification does not prove that every person in it is unaware of hearing loss.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "sigaccess-2019-conference-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sigaccess-2019-conference-guide/", "title": "Accessible Conference Guide (version 2.6)", "authors": "Shari Trewin, Vicki Hanson, Jennifer Rode, Jennifer Mankoff, Erin Brady, Meredith Ringel Morris, Donal Fitzpatrick, Faustina Hwang", "publisher": "ACM SIGACCESS", "date": "2019-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Accessibility guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (ACM special interest groups SIGACCESS, SIGCHI and SIGCAS endorse the guide)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/accessible-conference-guide/", "summary": "Conference organisers explain how to plan hearing access when selecting hotels, budgeting and running sessions.", "findings": [ "Recommends an accessibility chair, early collection and follow-up of access requests, and accurate website information about capabilities and limitations.", "Asks planners to visit venues where possible, ask detailed questions even when a hotel states it meets accessibility standards, and check whether meeting rooms have an induction loop.", "Includes microphones for presenters and audience questions in the audiovisual budget; suggests a volunteer carrying a roving microphone to participants.", "Venue Setup asks organisers of multi-track events to ensure each session has the requested equipment in place, and to provide a PA connection for laptops and microphones for speakers and audience questions." ], "limitations": "Experience-based guidance, initially drawn from ASSETS conferences of around 130 attendees and later extended to larger events. This is not a study sample or a requirements document. No comparative listening measurements. Version dated August 2019.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "mwib-2019-hearing-loss-in-church", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/mwib-2019-hearing-loss-in-church/", "title": "An Introduction to Supporting People with Hearing Loss in your Church", "authors": "Methodist Women in Britain", "publisher": "Methodist Women in Britain (MWiB)", "date": "2019-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Guidance leaflet (Methodist, for churches)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (Methodist Women in Britain, an organisation within the Methodist Church in Britain, writing for Methodist churches; it states that it has set aside funds for churches' provision for deaf people, but not for a basic loop system)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://cdn.mwib.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Supporting-People-with-Hearing-Loss.pdf", "summary": "A four-page Methodist guide for ministers, preachers and stewards on welcoming people with hearing loss, including running the church loop and using microphones in services.", "findings": [ "States that \"Churches have a duty to provide a loop system\", and that its grants will not fund a basic loop system but will consider other resources and training, such as signing.", "In services: ensure the church loop system is on and that a sign shows it exists; anyone speaking in a service or meeting should use a microphone and preferably come to the front; train those who speak to use microphones correctly; have one person speak at a time.", "Warns that background noises can be amplified through the loop as well as the main speaker, and that \"Switching off the microphone during singing can leave deaf people in a vacuum\": keep it on, or use a microphone that picks up the singing.", "Suggests a portable loop for meeting rooms, visible hymn boards or projected words, written orders of service, and that speakers not hide behind a lectern or other furniture so that lip readers can see them.", "Notes that speech-to-text aids are increasingly available and that interpreters may be needed for larger meetings, and that people's preferred way of communicating must be respected." ], "limitations": "Basic welcome guidance without data or technical detail; it names no loop standard and does not mention other assistive listening systems. Its statement of a duty to provide a loop is not tied to a named law. Dated August 2019 on the leaflet; the copy read was posted in October 2020.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship", "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "munich-2019-city-hall-hearing-systems", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/munich-2019-city-hall-hearing-systems/", "title": "Installation einer Induktiven Höranlage (Hörhilfsmittel) im kleinen Sitzungssaal und im Raum 209 des Rathauses (Installing a hearing system in the small council chamber and room 209 of the city hall)", "authors": "Frank K (Kommunalreferentin, Landeshauptstadt München)", "publisher": "Landeshauptstadt München, Kommunalreferat (city council information system)", "date": "2019-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Council correspondence (informational reply to a city council motion)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (City of Munich, municipal property department; reply agreed with the city's directorate, treasury, building department and disability advisory council)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://risi.muenchen.de/risi/dokument/v/5597752", "summary": "Munich city hall's answer to a council motion for hearing systems in three meeting rooms, recording which systems were chosen and why, including a choice made on cost.", "findings": [ "Answers a July 2017 motion for an induction loop in the small council chamber and a meeting room; the systems were planned with the city's directorate, treasury and disability advisory council.", "For the small council chamber it plans, as in the large chamber, infrared with individual receivers in the chamber itself (secure against eavesdropping, with no need to touch the existing floor) and a conventional loop on the visitors' gallery.", "Magnetic field and interference measurements showed that the gallery loops of the two chambers would interfere with each other and that compensation techniques would not solve it, so the looped areas on both galleries are limited, with signs on site.", "For room 209 (room 109 followed after a further review), a fixed radio system with individual receivers and a portable case system (ListenTALK) with neckloops were compared. Because the radio system cost about five times as much at nearly the same functionality, the participants, after a demonstration on site, chose the portable system, which needs no building work.", "The room 209 section on page 2 says the review involved representatives of the disability advisory council and its office; those involved chose the portable system after an on-site demonstration." ], "limitations": "One city's decision record: it gives a cost ratio but no prices, and does not say how the radio system and the portable system were specified or quoted. Its account of the gallery measurements gives no figures. In German. The letter's own date is not in the text read; the month comes from the PDF's creation date (1 August 2019).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs", "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "durham-2019-lecture-capture", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/durham-2019-lecture-capture/", "title": "Lecture Capture", "authors": "Durham Centre for Academic Development team", "publisher": "Durham University", "date": "2019-07-19", "kind": "University teaching guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (Durham University teaching guidance)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://dcad-resourcebank.webspace.durham.ac.uk/2019/07/19/lecture-capture/", "summary": "Lecture-capture guidance connects consistent microphone use to the live induction-loop feed and recommends repeating student questions.", "findings": [ "Lecture capture usually records the screen and lecturer’s voice and can include room video. Students can use recordings to revisit concepts and fill gaps in notes.", "The guidance tells lecturers always to use the microphone because it feeds the induction loop as well as improving recording audio.", "Lecturers should repeat student questions into the microphone so questions are present in the recording.", "The page describes lecture capture as a supplementary resource for attending classes." ], "limitations": "Practice guidance, with no evaluation of assistive-system performance or common audio routing across all campuses. Publication date comes from page metadata; the page was modified on 29 March 2023. Used only for the shared microphone path, not as evidence that a recording substitutes for live hearing access.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lecture-halls" ] }, { "id": "etsi-en-300-328", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-en-300-328/", "title": "ETSI EN 300 328 V2.2.2: wideband transmission systems; data transmission equipment operating in the 2.4 GHz band", "authors": "ETSI Technical Committee ERM", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2019-07-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Harmonised European standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/300300_300399/300328/02.02.02_60/en_300328v020202p.pdf", "summary": "The harmonised European standard for wideband data transmission equipment in the 2.4 GHz band, Bluetooth included; one voluntary way to show conformity with the EU Radio Equipment Directive.", "findings": [ "Limits RF output power to 20 dBm e.i.r.p., for frequency-hopping and other equipment alike.", "Equipment that is not frequency hopping is also limited to a power spectral density of 10 dBm per MHz.", "Non-adaptive equipment at 10 dBm e.i.r.p. or more is limited to a Medium Utilization factor of 10 % and to duty-cycle limits; these limits do not apply below 10 dBm.", "Names Bluetooth wireless technologies among its examples of the equipment it covers." ], "limitations": "Gives the limits used to show conformity, not the power a given product uses. Version 2.2.2, adopted 1 July 2019, was the latest in ETSI's archive when read.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "interference" ] }, { "id": "cta-2019-accessible-transportation-regs", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cta-2019-accessible-transportation-regs/", "title": "Accessible Transportation for Persons with Disabilities Regulations (SOR/2019-244)", "authors": "Canadian Transportation Agency", "publisher": "Justice Laws Website (Government of Canada)", "date": "2019-06-25", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Canadian Transportation Agency, the federal transport regulator)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2019-244/FullText.html", "summary": "Canada's accessibility rules for large air, rail, ferry and intercity bus carriers and the terminals that serve them, which require announcements in audio and visual formats and name no assistive listening system.", "findings": [ "Section 10: any public announcement about a departure or a gate or track assignment made for passengers waiting at a boarding area inside a terminal must be made in audio and visual formats, as must any safety or security announcement inside a terminal.", "Section 57: on request, a carrier must make any public announcement on board in an audio or a visual format.", "Section 6: staff who interact with passengers must take into account, among other things, whether a person \"uses an assistive device to assist them to hear\" and methods of communication that may help.", "Section 35: a passenger with a disability who cannot use an automated kiosk may go to the front of the line at a check-in or ticket counter; section 11 sets accessibility standards for terminal kiosks.", "Aircraft, trains and ferries must carry safety information in large print and Braille, or on electronic devices with adjustable volume and font size.", "Does not mention induction loops, hearing loops, telecoils, assistive listening systems, Bluetooth or Auracast." ], "limitations": "Covers federally regulated large carriers and terminals, not municipal transit. Read from the consolidated text current to 21 September 2026 and last amended on 25 June 2022; the date given is its registration. Most provisions came into force one year after registration. Building codes and the CSA B651 standard it cites may set further requirements, which were not checked here.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "ledda-2019", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ledda-2019/", "title": "Difference in Speech Recognition between a Default and Programmed Telecoil Program", "authors": "Ledda KT, Valente M, Oeding K, Kallogjeri D", "publisher": "Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 30(6):502-515 (Thieme)", "date": "2019-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (single-blinded randomized crossover trial)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Division of Adult Audiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis; no conflict of interest declared; Widex USA provided the hearing aids and Oaktree Products the telephone amplifier for use in the study)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/html/10.3766/jaaa.17128", "summary": "A trial comparing speech understanding through a hearing aid's default telecoil programme with the same telecoil programmed to match the fitted microphone response.", "findings": [ "Twenty experienced adult hearing aid users with slight to severe loss listened by telephone through one receiver-in-the-canal model (Widex Unique 440 Fusion), whose microphone programme had been fitted to NAL-NL1 by real-ear measurement. One telecoil programme stayed at the maker's default; the other was adjusted in a 2-cc coupler until its response matched the microphone's, aiming for an RSETS of 0 dB.", "The default telecoil's RSETS (its high-frequency average relative to the microphone) averaged -3.6 dB (SD 2.6) and was negative, from -2 to -8 dB, in 19 of the 20 aids; the programmed telecoil averaged 0.1 dB. The default response had a similar shape but was 0.4 to 5.8 dB lower from 200 to 800 Hz.", "Median sentence scores rose from 86.7% with the default telecoil to 92.8% with the programmed one, CNC word scores from 52% to 68% and phoneme scores from 74.6% to 84.7%; each difference was significant (p < 0.001).", "The authors state that there is no best practice for programming the telecoil. They recommend dispensing hearing aids with a telecoil that is activated at the fitting, programming it in the coupler after fitting the microphone to target, and demonstrating it for telephone and loop listening, which they note needs manual rather than automatic activation.", "Cites Delaware's 2016 law requiring audiologists to tell patients about telecoils, which the authors say was passed because citizens reported frustration at the lack of telecoil counselling." ], "limitations": "Telephone listening only, through one handset held in place by a headband; loops were not tested. One hearing aid model from one maker, which the authors note limits the findings because each maker sets its default telecoil differently. Behind-the-ear style only. Published online on 25 September 2018. Full publisher text was checked through a Wayback Machine capture dated 27 February 2024; the live page required JavaScript. The Discussion and Figure 6 support the RSETS and low-frequency figures, and the Acknowledgments identify the equipment providers.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "hallikainen-2019-neckloop-notes", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hallikainen-2019-neckloop-notes/", "title": "HI/VI induction neckloop recommendations? (forum reply with test notes on neckloops)", "authors": "Hallikainen H", "publisher": "Film-Tech Forum (cinema industry forum, archive)", "date": "2019-01-26", "kind": "Bench test notes (forum post by a maker's engineer)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Manufacturer (Harold Hallikainen's cinema-receiver test notes; the author describes the tested headphones as their own; neckloops and field-strength meter provided by Connections Unlimited; project funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.film-tech.com/ubb/f5/t003164.html", "summary": "A cinema-equipment engineer's notes, posted in reply to a question about neckloops, on the magnetic field that four neckloops gave when driven by a cinema infrared headset receiver, and on one hearing aid user's trial.", "findings": [ "Gives the target as a field averaging 100 mA/m over 60 seconds, with peaks about 12 dB higher (400 mA/m).", "The 26 January 2019 reply at 11:32 AM describes measuring IRH-230 no-carrier noise with a FoSmeter+ standing vertically at the centre of each neckloop lying flat on a table. The unmarked loop exceeded +16 dB relative to 100 mA/m at full volume. After reducing the volume until that loop read 0 dB, the Comtek NTC-102, NoizFree and Sennheiser EZT1011 each read +3 dB relative to it. The author inferred full-volume fields greater than +19 dB for those three loops; these are lower bounds from the reduced-drive comparison, not direct numerical full-volume readings.", "In the same reply's impedance method and table, the loops were driven at 400 Hz through a 12-ohm series resistor. Voltage measurements gave approximate impedances of 34 ohms for the unmarked loop, 36 ohms for Comtek NTC-102, 27 ohms for NoizFree and 33 ohms for Sennheiser EZT1011.", "Measured 6 inches (about 15 cm) above the unmarked loop, the field was 3 dB above 100 mA/m with full-volume noise; with programme audio through the cinema system it reached 12 dB above 100 mA/m, measured 6 inches outside the loop.", "The note ending 13 August 2012 specifies that the unmarked loop lay flat on a table for the six-inches-above measurement, using IRH-230 full-volume no-carrier noise. The six-inches-outside reading used programme audio through the IRC-28C infrared panel. The centre table has no exact measurement date, and no repeated measurement count is stated.", "In a trial with one hearing aid user whose aid switched to its telecoil automatically, none of the neckloops switched it, because a neckloop produces no static magnetic field; once the telecoil was on, the user heard the audio but said it sounded better through acoustic coupling.", "Reports a local audiologist's view that most of their clients use the hearing aid microphone at the cinema, and that a magnetic induction receiver held 6 inches above a neckloop gave good audio quality at 100 to 400 mA/m." ], "limitations": "Informal notes from tests run in 2012 and posted in 2019, by an engineer for the maker of the receiver tested. Meter positions (on a table, at the centre of the loop or 6 inches from it) do not reproduce a telecoil at the ear, no frequency response was measured, and the user trial involved one person and one hearing aid.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "neckloops", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "sterkens-2019-canadian-audiologist", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sterkens-2019-canadian-audiologist/", "title": "Hearing Loop – the Preferred Large Area Assistive Listening System: Here's Why", "authors": "Sterkens J", "publisher": "Canadian Audiologist 6(1)", "date": "2019-01-21", "kind": "Advocacy article", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (written by Juliëtte Sterkens, AuD, who according to the author note has worked since 2012 as an advocate for hearing loops and other assistive technology with the Hearing Loss Association of America, with grant funding from the David and Carol Myers Foundation; published in the Canadian Academy of Audiology's magazine)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://canadianaudiologist.ca/hearing-loop-large-area-system-feature/", "summary": "A loop advocate's case, written for audiologists, that hearing loops serve listeners better than RF, infrared or Wi-Fi systems, with a list of problems users report with borrowed receivers.", "findings": [ "Describes infrared as contained within a room, workable where there is no sunlight and free of RF interference, and most used in cinemas, performing arts venues and courtrooms. It says the need for an almost direct line of sight can cause frequent drop-outs, with a hand, clothing or a tall person causing a loud static noise.", "Says the advantages of RF and infrared are measured in ease of installation and lower installation cost for the venue, and that both can carry several channels for translation or audio description.", "Lists problems users report with borrowed receivers: batteries that are empty or nearly so, intermittent sound, unsanitary earphones, sound leaking from headphones, having to remove hearing aids to fit under-the-chin receivers, and staff unaware that neckloops exist.", "Says neckloops can become intermittent after rough handling and may be fitted to receivers too weak to give a field of 100-400 mA/m, and that installers of RF or infrared may not check the venue for electromagnetic interference, which telecoil users hear as a buzz.", "Cites a survey of hearing-aid wearers by the Committee for Communication Access in New Mexico in which 18% always used the equipment where a system required borrowing it, against 54.5% who always used a loop when one was available.", "Argues that Wi-Fi streaming to listeners' phones does not qualify as a public assistive listening system, needs technical confidence and adds delay, and that no consumer studies support it.", "Says loops can be more difficult, impractical and costlier to install at some facilities, and that more end users will ultimately bring the cost per user down.", "Says users of hearing aids without telecoils may have to remove their hearing aids for under-the-chin infrared receivers to fit in their ears.", "Says partners of people with more severe hearing loss have reported audible leakage of sound from the headphones of infrared or FM receivers." ], "limitations": "An advocacy article by a hearing loop advocate, with no measurements of its own. The New Mexico survey figures are second-hand: the article gives no sample size or method, and its reference (an article by Stephen Frazier in Sound Communications, October 2016) was not read. Date from the page's publication metadata.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "infrared-limits", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "places-of-worship", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "ndc-2019-campus-listening-systems", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ndc-2019-campus-listening-systems/", "title": "Assistive Listening Systems: Choosing the Right Technology for Your Campus", "authors": "National Deaf Center on Postsecondary Outcomes", "publisher": "National Deaf Center on Postsecondary Outcomes", "date": "2019-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Campus planning guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (developed by the National Deaf Center under US Department of Education OSEP grant HD326D160001; the document says its contents need not represent Department policy)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://nationaldeafcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Assistive-Listening-Systems_-Choosing-the-Right-Technology-for-Your-Campus.pdf", "summary": "A campus guide to loops, FM, infrared and the equipment and loan arrangements needed to make them usable.", "findings": [ "Loops allow listeners with telecoils to attend without borrowing a receiver; listeners without telecoils still need a portable receiver. The guide identifies large lecture halls and open events as advantageous loop settings.", "FM and infrared use receivers with headphones or neckloops. The guide describes infrared as suitable where privacy matters but vulnerable to obstructions and sunlight; FM tolerates obstructions and mobility but nearby systems need different channels.", "Public-event receivers must be available whenever events take place, so the same stock is unlikely to meet semester-long student loans. Student-loan demand varies, and spare equipment is recommended for breakage and additional requests.", "Purchasing considerations include durability, loanable chargers, microphone and coupling options. Systems should be kept working, charged and ready to use.", "The page 2 legal summary describes a 50-seat or fixed-seating/amplification trigger and says a loop removes the hearing-aid-compatible receiver share. Those statements omit qualifications in ADA 219.2–219.3, including the requirement that the loop serve every seat for the receiver exception." ], "limitations": "A 2019 guide, predating present Auracast installations, with no comparative measurements. Its legal summary should be checked against the actual ADA Standards. Portable personal-device discussion is outside venue-system scope; only shared transmission and campus loan-operation guidance is used here.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lecture-halls" ] }, { "id": "bavaria-2019-loop-planning", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bavaria-2019-loop-planning/", "title": "Induktive Höranlagen beim Freistaat Bayern: Planungsrichtlinien, Stand 01.01.2019 (Hearing loops in Bavarian state buildings: planning guidelines)", "authors": "Bavarian State Ministry for Housing, Building and Transport; text by Ertl F (Government of the Upper Palatinate) and Jaggo T (Landesverband Bayern der Schwerhörigen und Ertaubten)", "publisher": "Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wohnen, Bau und Verkehr", "date": "2019-01-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Government planning guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Bavarian State Ministry for Housing, Building and Transport, for state building projects; written with the technical officer of the Bavarian association of hard-of-hearing and deafened people, a hearing-loss organisation, and including a comparison table used with the permission of an engineer from the German hard-of-hearing association)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://mobilitaet.bayern.de/assets/stmi/min/181217-induktive-hoeranlagen.pdf", "summary": "A German state's planning rules for hearing loops in public buildings: how metal and stacked rooms limit them, which layouts to use, how to check quality and keep them working, and how they compare with FM and infrared.", "findings": [ "Says eddy currents in reinforced concrete and other metal can attenuate the loop signal by up to 10 dB per octave towards high frequencies; in its simulation of a 14 x 10 m perimeter loop, field variation across the room was 2.4 dB with no metal (7.5 A) and 13 dB over typical reinforced concrete (13 A), which it says fails IEC 60118-4 and calls for a phased array.", "Limits a perimeter loop to about 12 m wide without metal, and warns that makers' coverage figures assume no metal and ideal proportions: an amplifier rated for 1,000 m² may cover only about 80 m² to the standard in a real room. It says 100 V constant-voltage amplifiers almost never meet the standard because they cut high frequencies, and rules out comb or herringbone layouts for their dead zones.", "Says vertical spill between floors can hardly be controlled with reasonable effort, and that simulations are reliable only if the floor build-up can be measured in the shell, after the room layout is fixed; looped rooms should not be planned one above another, or a different system may be needed. In a few cases, spill travelled vertically through metal building parts, mainly columns, in ways not yet explained.", "Lists avoidable errors in loops already built: looped rooms directly above one another, neighbouring rooms with simple perimeter loops (which then cannot be used at the same time), and loops in classrooms, for which it points to FM systems instead.", "Requires a metal loss and interference field measurement before design, a test report to IEC 60118-4 with at least six evenly spread points, checks of loop cable continuity after laying, after the floor covering and at commissioning, and the loop's position recorded in the building plans.", "Requires loops to be on whenever the public is present rather than switched on by request, and to be checked at regular intervals and before use by a trained person with a portable loop receiver showing field level; it names transformers, distribution boards, faulty electrical installations and unsuitable dimmers as sources of interfering fields.", "Its comparison table rates equipment and installation cost as lowest for loops (factor 1), about twice that for FM and about 2.5 times for infrared, with no receivers to issue for telecoil users; it notes that ear-hook receivers are useless for hearing aid users, who need neckloops.", "The equipment-and-installation cost row is on printed page 23; the table's notes on page 24 credit permission from Carsten Ruhe of the Deutscher Schwerhörigenbund. The factors are presented without underlying project prices.", "Treats a loop's quality as proven only when every value the standard requires is reached and recorded at enough measuring points, and recommends a loop receiver with headphones so that staff with normal hearing can check the whole chain.", "In the summary notes added for this edition, it reports the closing statement of the 4th international congress on hearing systems and accessibility (\"Future Loops\", Berlin, 6-7 October 2017): classic induction is considered sustainable and supported worldwide, and the urgently needed standards for future multichannel systems have not yet been written. It then states that new technologies such as 2.4 GHz, Bluetooth and WLAN systems still have great development potential compared with induction and are beset by unresolved problems: power consumption, a strongly limited number of users, excessive delay of the audio signal, unsatisfactory range and no uniform standards.", "Says figure-of-eight loops leave a band without reception over the centre line, with null lines between the loops, while phased arrays give very even coverage without null lines; in its simulation a low-spill array keeps the field to the room it serves, with no crosstalk sideways.", "Says that in extreme cases, under flat metal structures, loops cannot be used and another kind of system must be chosen, among those it describes (including FM and infrared).", "Section 1.1, printed page 4, generally calls for loops in assembly rooms, auditoria and lecture halls used for assembly, and foyers used for events. Partial coverage in facilities such as extensive sports venues is to be agreed with disability representatives.", "Printed page 5 calls for locally confined loops at service and information counters with closed glazing and intercoms. Noisy counters and rooms handling confidential matters need case-specific discussion with disability representatives, with privacy secured where necessary by other measures such as acoustic separation." ], "limitations": "Planning guidance for Bavarian state buildings, not a study (its cost factors match the German hard-of-hearing association's table, which the association itself calls qualitative; see dsb-2013-warum-induktive-hoeranlagen): the metal loss example is a simulation, and the 1,000 m² to 80 m² example and cost factors are given without data. One of the authors represents a hearing-loss organisation that advocates loops, and the guidance calls loops the best technical aid. It cites DIN EN IEC 60118-4 and German building standards. Its list of problems with 2.4 GHz, Bluetooth and WLAN systems reflects its 2019 status and gives no sources or measurements. The date is the edition's stated status date (Stand 01.01.2019); the file was created in December 2018 and last modified in December 2019.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "commissioning-tests", "future-proofing", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "infrared-limits", "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "sennheiser-2019-tourguide-brochure", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sennheiser-2019-tourguide-brochure/", "title": "Tourguide 2020-D: Information becomes an experience. Quite simply. (product brochure)", "authors": "Sennheiser electronic", "publisher": "Sennheiser electronic GmbH & Co. KG", "date": "2019-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Manufacturer product brochure", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sennheiser, which sells the Tourguide system described as well as Wi-Fi assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.sennheiser.com/globalassets/digizuite/44217-en-tourguide_productbrochure_en.pdf", "summary": "A maker's brochure for a digital radio system for tours, conferences and assistive listening, in the 863-865 MHz band in Europe and 926-928 MHz in the US.", "findings": [ "Describes a digital system (2 FSK modulation) for visitor guidance, conferences and assistive listening, operating at 863-865 MHz, or 926-928 MHz in its US version.", "Says it runs in a \"license-free ISM frequency band\" that \"can be operated world wide\", and is therefore quick to set up \"without elaborate frequency planning\".", "Gives 6 channels in tour-guide mode and 8 in conference mode.", "Says hearing aids can be connected for assistive listening in theatres or opera houses, with a bodypack receiver used with headphones or an induction neckloop for hearing aids with a telecoil.", "Gives the receiver's frequency response as 100-7,000 Hz." ], "limitations": "A marketing brochure with no test data. Its description of 863-865 MHz as a worldwide licence-free ISM band differs from the CEPT entry for that band, which is shared with radio microphones and depends on national rules. No date is printed; the year is the file's creation date (17 May 2019).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands", "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "contacta-menuhin-school", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/contacta-menuhin-school/", "title": "Hearing loop at Yehudi Menuhin School", "authors": "Contacta", "publisher": "Contacta", "date": "2018-11-30", "kind": "Manufacturer installation case study", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Contacta describing its own loop equipment and installation)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.contacta.co.uk/case-studies/the-yehudi-menuhin-school/", "summary": "A manufacturer describes fitting loops to two seating levels in a school’s 300-seat performance hall.", "findings": [ "The opening description identifies a 300-seat hall where the school wanted its upper-seating loop replaced and ground-floor coverage added. The hall also hosts public hire events.", "Contacta reports choosing perimeter loops because repeated cuts for a ground-floor array risked damaging the wooden interior. Greater metal loss upstairs and differing loop sizes required different currents.", "The account describes concealed cabling and a dual-output driver, but supplies no field-strength map or audience test results." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer account, not independent verification or a comparison of listener preferences. The visible date is 30 November; embedded publication metadata supplies 2018. Modification metadata is 2 September 2022.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2018-en-301-549-v2", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2018-en-301-549-v2/", "title": "EN 301 549 V2.1.2: Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services", "authors": "ETSI, CEN and CENELEC", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2018-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "European standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, CEN and CENELEC)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301500_301599/301549/02.01.02_60/en_301549v020102p.pdf", "summary": "A historical edition of the European ICT accessibility standard, including magnetic coupling for hearing technologies.", "findings": [ "The cover and document history identify publication in 2018-08.", "Clause 8.2.2.1 requires magnetic coupling for fixed-line devices with speech output held to the ear when they carry the T symbol.", "Clause 8.2.2.2 also addresses magnetic coupling in wireless communication devices with speech output normally held to the ear.", "The foreword gives adoption on 24 August 2018; it describes revisions for the Web Accessibility Directive, web and mobile requirements and error corrections." ], "limitations": "Public full text downloaded; the foreword, publication history and hearing-related clauses were read. Applies to ICT equipment, including relevant venue equipment, rather than room-wide listening-system provision. Publication alone does not establish legal application or an Official Journal citation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "kressner-2018", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/kressner-2018/", "title": "The impact of reverberation on speech intelligibility in cochlear implant recipients", "authors": "Kressner AA, Westermann A, Buchholz JM", "publisher": "Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 144(2):1113", "date": "2018-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Technical University of Denmark and Macquarie University; Europe PMC lists a grant from the Danish Council for Independent Research, Technology and Production, DFF-5054-00072; one of the three authors is listed at the hearing aid maker Widex)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5051640", "summary": "Re-examined how much reverberation harms cochlear implant users' speech understanding, using loudspeaker-based simulations of real rooms at plausible talker distances.", "findings": [ "Notes that earlier studies suggested implant users have almost no tolerance for reverberation and are harmed by both early and late reflections.", "Measured speech intelligibility with a loudspeaker-based auralisation of a range of real rooms at plausible source-receiver distances, with and without late reflections, instead of the non-individualised binaural simulations used before.", "Found the effect of reverberation much smaller than earlier studies suggested, especially at short source-receiver distances.", "Found that, contrary to earlier literature, early reflections may not harm implant users." ], "limitations": "Read from the abstract only; the number of participants and the scores could not be read. Simulated rooms in a laboratory; no assistive listening system was tested.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants", "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "bsa-2018-probe-microphone", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bsa-2018-probe-microphone/", "title": "Practice Guidance: Guidance on the verification of hearing devices using probe microphone measurements", "authors": "British Society of Audiology Professional Guidance Group (lead authors Jindal J, Hawkins A-M, Murray M)", "publisher": "British Society of Audiology", "date": "2018-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Professional guidance (practice guidance)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (British Society of Audiology, a professional and scientific society; one of the three lead authors declares that, as clinical lead at IntriCon UK, they train clinicians on probe-microphone measurement and systems, which may promote products IntriCon or other suppliers distribute; the major UK suppliers of measurement systems were consulted)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.thebsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/REMS-2018.pdf", "summary": "The UK professional society's step-by-step guidance on verifying hearing aid fittings with probe-microphone (real-ear) measurements.", "findings": [ "Recommends probe-microphone measurement as the starting point for verifying that a hearing device meets its prescription target in the individual ear, measured on the everyday listening programme.", "Says probe-microphone measurements can also verify digital features such as directionality, noise reduction and frequency lowering, and gives a procedure for frequency lowering.", "The 32-page guidance does not mention telecoils, hearing loops or telephone programmes." ], "limitations": "Limited by its own scope to fitting verification with probe microphones. Its stated review date was May 2021; the society's website still offered this version when it was read. The absence of telecoil guidance is this record's reading of the full text, not a statement in the document.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "doj-2018-palm-springs-museum-settlement", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2018-palm-springs-museum-settlement/", "title": "Settlement Agreement between the United States and the Palm Springs Art Museum (DOJ complaint 202-12C-523)", "authors": "US Department of Justice; Palm Springs Art Museum", "publisher": "US Department of Justice", "date": "2018-03-22", "kind": "Regulatory enforcement (settlement agreement)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice enforcement agreement with the museum)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://archive.ada.gov/palm_springs_museum_sa.html", "summary": "A California museum settlement following two complaints, including a faulty film-listening device, required free receivers, working equipment, signs, training and complaint handling across three facilities.", "findings": [ "The agreement took effect on the last signature, 22 March 2018, and covered three museum facilities in Palm Springs and Palm Desert, California, for three years unless extended.", "One complaint, dated 7 January 2015, concerned the absence of a properly functioning assistive listening device for a film. A separate complaint concerned access to an audio tour. The US Attorney’s Office found failures to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services; the parties settled to avoid litigation.", "Under the specific remedial measures, within four months the museum had to furnish listening devices free of charge and provide receivers equal to at least 4% of fixed seats in each theatre and lecture hall, with 25% of those receivers hearing-aid compatible.", "The museum had to maintain accessible equipment in working order, post at least one availability sign at each museum’s ticket desk or booth, and state on its website that auxiliary aids were available and how to request them.", "The agreement required a designated access officer, a complaint-resolution policy submitted within thirty days and implemented within thirty days of approval, supervisor and manager training within sixty days, and training for new supervisors and managers within thirty days of hire or promotion.", "Annual reports to the US Attorney’s Office had to document changes, training and adopted policies. The agreement permitted inspections and court enforcement if unresolved failures occurred." ], "limitations": "The agreement includes other communication aids outside this library’s main scope. Its 4% receiver term is reported as the museum’s settlement obligation; it is not presented as a general restatement of Table 219.3. The signed dates establish March 2018 despite the archive page’s later footer date. No later performance audit was read.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "complaints-and-cases" ] }, { "id": "cept-2018-ecc-report-270", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cept-2018-ecc-report-270/", "title": "ECC Report 270: Sharing studies between Telecoil Replacement Systems (TRS) and Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) in the frequency range 1656.5-1660.5 MHz", "authors": "CEPT Electronic Communications Committee (ECC)", "publisher": "European Communications Office (ECO Documentation Database)", "date": "2018-01-26", "kind": "Regulatory report (CEPT compatibility study)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (CEPT, the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations, whose Electronic Communications Committee brings together national spectrum regulators)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://docdb.cept.org/document/1033", "summary": "The European regulators' study that preceded the 1656.5-1660.5 MHz designation for digital assistive listening systems in public spaces, shared with satellite uplinks.", "findings": [ "Describes \"telecoil replacement systems\" as digital radio links from a public address or programme feed to receivers worn by users or built into hearing aids, for airports, railway stations, churches and theatres, carrying three or more audio channels in 200-600 kHz.", "States that, despite the name, these systems are meant to supplement telecoil systems in places where a loop is impractical.", "Assumes indoor deployment on a licensed basis, and proposes a transmitter power of no more than 3 dBm e.i.r.p.; in its worked example, one 600 kHz channel under one satellite beam can take 59 transmitters at 3 dBm with 6 dB of wall loss, 21 at 12.5 dBm, and 1,472 at 3 dBm with 20 dB of wall loss.", "Notes that no ETSI harmonised standard for these systems existed when it was written, so some parameters came from Recommendation ITU-R M.1076, and that not all system characteristics were defined.", "Says coexistence with aircraft satellite terminals can never be fully ensured, but more than 600 hours of monitoring at sites in six countries detected no potentially harmful interference from aeronautical systems, and land terminals needed separation distances of at most about 250 m.", "Suggests that administrations may manage deployment by licensing individual base stations." ], "limitations": "A desk sharing study with limited monitoring; it models the UK under one satellite beam and says other satellite systems may give different results. It describes systems that were not yet fully defined and reports no products, user tests or audio performance.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2018-hearing-impaired-transmission", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2018-hearing-impaired-transmission/", "title": "ETSI TR 103 225 V1.1.1: Speech and multimedia Transmission Quality (STQ); Transmission quality and speech intelligibility for hearing impaired people", "authors": "ETSI Technical Committee STQ", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2018-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Standards technical report", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, whose members include telecommunications manufacturers)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/103200_103299/103225/01.01.01_60/tr_103225v010101p.pdf", "summary": "Reviews how speech-transmission quality and intelligibility should be assessed for people with hearing loss.", "findings": [ "Clause 3.1 identifies signal quality, noise, reverberation and communication-system properties as influences on intelligibility.", "Clauses 5 and 6 distinguish word-identification tests from quality and intelligibility prediction models. The report notes that several existing methods were developed or validated with normal-hearing listeners.", "Clause 6.2 calls for development and validation of a model addressing the reviewed gaps for hearing-impaired listeners.", "The Introduction (printed p. 5) identifies transmission impairments, listening effort and receive-side processing as research topics, and asks for different coupling methods and device types, including cochlear implants, to be considered. This is telecommunications guidance, used here only to identify shared-path assessment gaps." ], "limitations": "A January 2018 review about telecommunications, not a venue trial or a current survey of prediction methods. Used as shared-path evidence for separating quality ratings from speech understanding; it supplies no Auracast result.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "healthwatch-southampton-2018-central-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/healthwatch-southampton-2018-central-loops/", "title": "Hearing Loops in Central Southampton: Auditing hearing loops in shops and restaurants across central Southampton", "authors": "Lets Loop Southampton and Healthwatch Southampton", "publisher": "Lets Loop Southampton", "date": "2018-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Local audit report (volunteer field checks)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Lets Loop Southampton and Healthwatch Southampton volunteer audit; separate audit funding is not specified; the report describes a £4,000 GoSouthampton contribution for businesses to obtain loops)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://letsloopsouthampton.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Hearing-Loops-in-Central-Southampton-Report.pdf", "summary": "Volunteers visiting 295 central Southampton shops in 2017 found loops in 39, and described faults, missing signs and repairs following the visits.", "findings": [ "The John Lewis case study dates its audit to March 2017 (printed page 8). The St Mary's Stadium case study says a March 2017 Saints Store audit led to a later stadium visit and discussion, without dating that visit or describing its test procedure (printed page 9). The shop methodology lists checks and staff questions but does not specify a meter or listening receiver (printed page 6).", "Trained volunteers visited 295 shops during 2017, checking loop availability and operation and asking about signs, whether loops stayed on, staff training, named staff and evidence of regular testing (page 6).", "The publisher-hosted PDF table counts 39 of 295 locations (13%) as fitted with loops, including 18 of 128 in West Quay and none of 42 in Marlands; it counts presence rather than a published total of functioning loops (page 7).", "The publisher-hosted PDF says four of 29 newly built Watermark shops and restaurants had loops, and all five Costa branches visited had loops and signs (page 7).", "ASDA’s loop was present but not operating correctly; Body Shop repaired a faulty loop after the audit, and John Lewis repaired three affected loops and added signage (pages 7-8).", "After concerns about a poor-quality ticket-office loop and missing provision at St Mary’s Stadium, the report describes improvements and installation of more than 20 loops there (page 9).", "One hearing-aid user and volunteer, Keith, describes difficulty following shop staff amid background noise and music without a loop, and reports that loops help communication (page 5).", "Two public PDF versions differ on pages 6-7. The publisher-hosted version gives West Quay as 18 of 128 locations, Hanover/Queensway as four of 23, Watermark as four of 29, and loops and signs at five of five Costa branches. The Healthwatch-hosted version gives the corresponding figures as 18 of 113, four of 38, four of 24, and four of five. Both give 39 of 295 overall. Neither version identifies a revision date that establishes which figures supersede the others." ], "limitations": "One city's volunteer audit and improvement campaign, with no published field-strength measurements, speech scores, count of functioning loops across all 295 sites, aggregate signage results or breakdown by portable versus fixed systems. The listener account is one person's experience. Both PDFs print 2018; Healthwatch's catalogue lists 1 April 2018, so year precision is retained. The catalogue's four-of-five Costa count agrees with its linked PDF; the publisher-hosted PDF gives five of five. The area and branch figures differ between versions and should be attributed to the copy used. Reported repairs and new installations have no published follow-up measurements. The methodology and results do not record installer qualifications or compare training routes, and do not separate initial installation quality from later upkeep.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "service-counters", "loop-verification", "portable-and-counter-loops", "installers-and-training", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "goehring-2018", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/goehring-2018/", "title": "Tolerable delay for speech production and perception: effects of hearing ability and experience with hearing aids", "authors": "Goehring T, Chapman JL, Bleeck S, Monaghan JJM", "publisher": "International Journal of Audiology 57(1):61-68", "date": "2018-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (University of Southampton; EPSRC and EU Seventh Framework Programme grants)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28838277/", "summary": "Measured how much processing delay listeners with and without hearing loss tolerate for their own voice and for an external voice.", "findings": [ "20 listeners with normal hearing and 20 with mild to moderate hearing loss rated their annoyance, on a 7-point scale, at processing delays up to 50 ms in own-voice and external-voice conditions.", "Listeners with hearing loss tolerated significantly more delay in two of three voice conditions, and the more hearing loss a listener had, the less their annoyance rose as the delay increased.", "Experienced hearing-aid users showed a small trend toward tolerating more delay than new users, which was not significant." ], "limitations": "Annoyance ratings with a laboratory processing setup that the authors say differed from commercial hearing aids. It does not test an assistive-listening stream that arrives before the room sound.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "cochlear-2017-accessory-mixing", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cochlear-2017-accessory-mixing/", "title": "Clinical Quick Tips: A closer look at accessory mixing in the Nucleus 7 Sound Processor", "authors": "Catlett D", "publisher": "Cochlear Professional News (Cochlear Americas)", "date": "2017-12-26", "kind": "Manufacturer article", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Cochlear; written by Dave Catlett, AuD, a regional clinical training manager at Cochlear Americas)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pronews.cochlear.com/clinical-quick-tips-accessory-mixing-nucleus-7-sound-processor/", "summary": "A Cochlear training note for clinicians on how the Nucleus 7 cochlear implant processor mixes accessory or telecoil input with its own microphones, and how the mix is set and changed.", "findings": [ "Defines the mixing ratio as the amount of accessory or telecoil input presented to the user relative to the processor microphone input.", "Gives the default accessory mixing ratio as 1:1 for children, so the remote microphone and the processor microphone are equally loud, and 2:1 for adults, which attenuates the processor microphone by 6 dB while streaming.", "Clinicians set the ratio in the fitting software from 1:1 to 6:1, with increasing microphone attenuation, or to accessory or telecoil input only.", "Users can change the balance while streaming, in the Nucleus Smart App or the iPhone's accessibility controls, in steps of 1.5 dB. Their changes last only until the processor is switched off; if a user keeps changing the mix, the author advises the clinician to reprogramme the default.", "States that the Nucleus 7 has a built-in telecoil for telephones, neck loops and looped rooms such as some theatres, churches and meeting rooms, and that it works with Phonak Roger 20 FM receivers." ], "limitations": "A maker's training note about one processor generation (Nucleus 7), first published in December 2017 and last modified in June 2023. It describes settings and gives no evidence on which mix works best for listeners in venues.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "qsc-2017-cinema-accessibility-best-practices", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/qsc-2017-cinema-accessibility-best-practices/", "title": "QSC Accessibility Solutions Best Practices", "authors": "Hallikainen H (QSC)", "publisher": "QSC LLC (white paper)", "date": "2017-11-29", "kind": "Manufacturer white paper", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (QSC, which sells cinema sound processors and infrared assistive listening, audio description and captioning equipment for cinemas; written by Harold Hallikainen of QSC. The revision history shows a first draft in April 2013 and a 2017 update that relabels the earlier USL products as QSC's and the Doremi products as Dolby's)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.qscaudio.com/resource-files/whitepapers/q_wp_cin_accessibilitybestpractices.pdf", "summary": "A cinema-equipment maker's guide to the hearing-impaired (assistive listening) and audio description channels in cinemas: where the audio comes from, how loops, radio and infrared carry it, and how receivers reach hearing aids.", "findings": [ "Describes assistive listening audio, often called HI (hearing impaired), as generally a \"dialog-centric\" copy of the main audio with reduced dynamic range, carried to patrons by magnetic induction, radio or infrared. Cinema processors have long provided an HI output that mixes the left, centre and right channels, and many transmitters, including the maker's infrared emitters, compress it further.", "Says many digital cinema packages carry an HI track on track 7, but not all do, especially trailers, and pre-show and live content may not come in a package at all; \"it appears the most reliable source of HI audio is the LCR mix provided by the cinema processor\". Audio description (VI-N) usually comes on track 8.", "On loops in cinemas: one audio channel per auditorium, and possible interference from mains wiring and adjacent auditoriums. Because the one channel generally carries HI audio, audio description is generally restricted to radio and infrared.", "On radio: the signal does not stop at the auditorium walls, so a patron may choose the wrong channel and hear another auditorium's film; systems with few channels may have trouble reusing frequencies between auditoriums; and unencrypted radio audio can be intercepted outside, \"possibly assisting in movie piracy\".", "On infrared: an emitter on the rear wall or in the projector port is aimed at the screen so the signal reflects from it and other surfaces across the auditorium; it generally carries two channels (HI and audio description) and does not leave the room, so the patron cannot pick up the wrong auditorium.", "Says some hearing aids switch to the telecoil automatically in response to a telephone's static magnetic field, which loops and neckloops do not produce, so such aids get no audio from them unless they have a manual switch; headphones placed over the hearing aids give both fields and can switch the telecoil on. All receivers have the 1/8 inch mono jack the ADA requires, for neckloops or direct audio input.", "Lists ways to keep headphones sanitary: antibacterial wipes, replaceable ear pads, or patrons buying their own; the maker's 2.3 MHz infrared headphones also work with a consumer infrared TV headphone system.", "Compares its infrared system with Dolby's and Sony's radio-linked systems, listing 32 audio radio channels for Dolby's and 7 for Sony's and noting that infrared needs no channel reuse between auditoriums." ], "limitations": "A maker's white paper that compares its own infrared system favourably with competitors' radio systems; it reports no measurements, user data or tests. Written for US cinemas under the ADA. The date is the last entry in the revision history (29 November 2017); the PDF was created on 29 December 2017.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "iec-62489-1-2017", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-62489-1-2017/", "title": "IEC 62489-1:2010+AMD1:2014+AMD2:2017 Electroacoustics - Audio-frequency induction loop systems for assisted hearing - Part 1: Methods of measuring and specifying the performance of system components", "authors": "IEC TC 29 (Electroacoustics)", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "2017-11-27", "kind": "Standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission; the full text is sold, and only the abstract and a preview are public)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/62119", "summary": "The IEC standard for measuring and specifying the parts of a hearing loop system, such as loop amplifiers, microphones and neck loops, for type testing.", "findings": [ "Applies to the components of audio-frequency induction-loop systems: amplifiers, microphones and other components such as playback equipment. Its stated aim is accurate and uniform presentation of manufacturers' specifications that standardised measurements can verify, and it is intended for type testing.", "Is to be used together with IEC 60118-4, which sets the performance of the installed system. It does not deal with safety (IEC 60065), electromagnetic compatibility or human exposure to electromagnetic fields.", "The public preview's contents list amplifier characteristics to be specified, including magnetic field strength, frequency response, automatic gain control and compression, and the phase error of the networks that drive phased loop arrays.", "The preview also lists clauses on neck loops (input voltage, input impedance, frequency response), a normative annex with a test jig for measuring neck loops, specifications for loop listeners and assistive listening devices, and recommendations for monitoring devices.", "Defines a telecoil as a magnetic pickup coil intended to receive signals from a loop system to IEC 60118-4, which can be part of a hearing aid or of another receiving device.", "The catalogue lifecycle metadata dates edition 1.0 to 27 January 2010, Amendment 1 and consolidated edition 1.1 to 17 December 2014, and Amendment 2 and consolidated edition 1.2 to 27 November 2017. The individual amendments were not read, so their technical changes are not established here." ], "limitations": "Read from the IEC webstore abstract and the publisher's public preview (contents, foreword, scope and definitions); the measurement methods and any recommended values are paywalled. It is a type-test standard for components, so it says nothing about whether a particular installed loop performs. The consolidated edition 1.2 combines the 2010 first edition with amendments of 2014 and 2017; the IEC lists 2029 as its stability date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "loan-receivers", "loop-limits", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "iec-60118-4-2017-amendment", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-60118-4-2017-amendment/", "title": "IEC 60118-4:2014/AMD1:2017: Amendment 1 - Electroacoustics - Hearing aids - Part 4: Induction-loop systems for hearing aid purposes - System performance requirements", "authors": "IEC TC 29 (Electroacoustics)", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "2017-11-09", "kind": "Standard amendment (public preview)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission; public preview of the unchanged European adoption supplied by standards reseller iTeh, plus IEC catalogue metadata)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/59636", "summary": "The 2017 amendment replaces the small-volume systems clause and explains the trade-off between counter coverage and spill to adjacent counters.", "findings": [ "The IEC catalogue dates the amendment 9 November 2017. The European endorsement in the preview states that the IEC text was adopted without modification.", "Replaces clause 9 on small-volume systems. Clause 9.1 specifies measurement points for call points and counters, with an alternative useful magnetic field volume method where the specified points are impractical, to be agreed in the contract.", "Clause 9.3 makes the user-facing surface of the counter the reference position, which need not coincide with the magnetic field source. Counter measurement points are specified in Figure 3, which is outside the preview read.", "Clause 9.3 says controlling spill to an adjacent counter can require a compromise in field evenness across the area where people stand. Its first note says a difference greater than 20 dB between equivalent positions at the two counters is normally enough, and relates this to the acoustic spill between counters.", "The following notes say listening-area boundaries depend on the counter and building layout, and that setting a vertical loop back from the counter reference position improves field evenness but reduces control of spill to the next counter." ], "limitations": "Only IEC catalogue metadata and a nine-page public preview of SIST EN IEC 60118-4:2015/A1:2018 were read. The preview reproduces IEC amendment pages 2-5, including clause 9.3, but stops before Figure 3 and clauses 9.4-9.5. It therefore does not resolve the numeric field-tolerance differences in secondary summaries. The preview URL is https://cdn.standards.iteh.ai/samples/64211/23d29fa559a84a70bcdf3f442d9e71f5/SIST-EN-IEC-60118-4-2015-A1-2018.pdf. The adjacent-counter note is a relative difference, not an absolute waiting-area field limit or a privacy test.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "grandpierre-2018-parent-reflections", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/grandpierre-2018-parent-reflections/", "title": "School-aged Children with Mild Bilateral and Unilateral Hearing Loss: Parents’ Reflections on Services, Experiences, and Outcomes", "authors": "Viviane Grandpierre; Elizabeth M. Fitzpatrick; Eunjung Na; Oreen Mendonca", "publisher": "The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education / Oxford University Press", "date": "2017-10-31", "kind": "Peer-reviewed qualitative study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (academic research supported by a Ministry of Health and Innovation Early Researcher award, a Canadian Institutes of Health Research New Investigator Award and a Canadian Child Health Clinician Scientist Award)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enx049", "summary": "Parent interviews describe noisy school-gym listening and varied school support; they do not compare venue technologies.", "findings": [ "The study covers 12 Ottawa-area families. The methods describe 11 interviews with one parent and one with two parents, despite the abstract’s description of 12 parents. The Participants section says the children had mild bilateral or unilateral hearing loss and all parents had typical hearing.", "In the social-functioning results, one parent describes shouting and echoes making it difficult for their child to hear in the school gym.", "In Experiences in Early School Years, nearly half reported appreciation for school support; four described needing more resources and having to advocate. Parents valued staff equipment checks and instruction, while some reported teachers’ reluctance to use hearing technology in the classroom." ], "limitations": "Full text read in PubMed Central. Small, relatively well-educated sample, parent recollections and no venue-system measurements. Personal microphone and classroom experiences are relevant only to the shared staff-support path. Published online in October 2017, in the April 2018 issue.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "einhorn-2017", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/einhorn-2017/", "title": "Can Apple AirPods be used as hearing aids?", "authors": "Einhorn R", "publisher": "Hearing Review 24(10):24-25", "date": "2017-09-22", "kind": "Trade article (bench test by a hearing-app maker)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Manufacturer (the measurements are Jacoti's, a maker of hearing apps, one of which was among those tested; the author states being a consultant for Jacoti and thanks its software team for the data)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://hearingreview.com/hearing-products/hearing-aids/can-apple-airpods-used-hearing-aids", "summary": "A trade-journal article reporting a hearing-app maker's measurements of the delay added when an iPhone app sends live sound to Bluetooth earbuds instead of wired earphones.", "findings": [ "Jacoti measured the delay of an iPhone hearing app sending live sound to Apple AirPods over Bluetooth at 192 ms with the AirPods' microphone, and 295 ms and 258 ms with the iPhone's two microphones; its own app gave 266 ms with AirPods.", "With the same maker's app and Apple's wired Lightning EarPods, the delay was 16 ms.", "States that Bluetooth latency \"can easily be 60-80 ms or more\" depending on how the protocol is implemented on a device, and that Apple modified Bluetooth LE to shorten the audio delay for its made-for-iPhone hearing aids.", "Cites hearing-aid literature that above 40 ms, sound \"may fall out of synchronization with the visual information and interfere with speech reading\", and concludes that Bluetooth earbuds were impractical for live listening through phone apps because listeners would see lips out of step with the voice.", "The Testing an iPhone Hearing App section distinguishes the AirPods microphone from iPhone microphone 1 (1-person mode) and microphone 2 (Group mode). The Conclusion identifies the wired 16 ms route as the Lightning EarPods microphone through Jacoti ListenApp. The microphone used for the separate 266 ms ListenApp/AirPods result is not specified.", "In the Results and Conclusion passages, the 192 ms wireless result uses the AirPods onboard microphone, while 295 and 258 ms use the two iPhone microphone modes. The 16 ms wired result uses Jacoti ListenApp and the microphone on Lightning EarPods. These are not controlled estimates of Bluetooth transport delay alone." ], "limitations": "A maker's own measurements, reported by its consultant, with no stated method, repetitions or iOS version; the tests use phone or earbud microphones through a phone app, with different apps and input microphones across conditions, not from a venue's Wi-Fi stream. Tested 2016-2017 AirPods; Bluetooth earbuds, phones and hearing-aid streaming have changed since. Published online on 22 September 2017 for the October 2017 issue.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "irs-disabled-access-credit-form-8826", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/irs-disabled-access-credit-form-8826/", "title": "Form 8826: Disabled Access Credit (Rev. September 2017)", "authors": "Internal Revenue Service", "publisher": "US Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service", "date": "2017-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Guidance (IRS tax form and instructions)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (US Internal Revenue Service)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8826.pdf", "summary": "The IRS form defines eligible small businesses and access expenditures and calculates the disabled access credit.", "findings": [ "Page 1 subtracts US$250 from eligible access expenditures, caps the remainder at US$10,000 and multiplies by 50%; the resulting maximum credit is US$5,000.", "An eligible small business had no more than US$1 million in gross receipts or no more than 30 full-time employees in the preceding tax year and elects to claim the credit. The instructions define full time as at least 30 hours a week for at least 20 calendar weeks.", "Page 2, Eligible Access Expenditures, requires expenditure to meet applicable ADA requirements as in effect on 5 November 1990 and to be reasonable and necessary. Categories include methods of making audio materials available to people with hearing impairments and acquiring or modifying equipment or devices for people with disabilities.", "The exclusion for facilities first placed in service after 5 November 1990 is attached to the barrier-removal category, item 1; the form does not state that every equipment purchase in a newer facility is excluded.", "Page 2, Line 6, denies a second tax benefit for expenditure equal to the credit amount shown on line 6: that amount may not be deducted, capitalised or used to calculate another credit." ], "limitations": "September 2017 revision still served at the IRS PDF URL when read on 13 October 2026. General tax instructions, with no ruling on any venue or named listening system. The form was visually checked because text extraction omitted its preprinted US$250 and US$10,000 amounts.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "etsi-en-300-422-4", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-en-300-422-4/", "title": "ETSI EN 300 422-4 V2.1.1: Wireless Microphones; Audio PMSE up to 3 GHz; Part 4: Assistive Listening Devices including personal sound amplifiers and inductive systems up to 3 GHz", "authors": "ETSI Technical Committee ERM", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2017-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Harmonised European standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI; a harmonised standard under the EU Radio Equipment Directive 2014/53/EU)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/300400_300499/30042204/02.01.01_60/en_30042204v020101p.pdf", "summary": "The European harmonised standard that radio assistive listening devices up to 3 GHz can use to show they meet the Radio Equipment Directive's spectrum requirements, with an installation check for the band shared with digital radio.", "findings": [ "Covers assistive listening devices using analogue (FM), digital or hybrid modulation up to 3 GHz, their accessories, and hearing aids with telecoil receivers.", "Sets a general transmitter power limit of 10 mW, up to 500 mW in 169.4-169.8125 MHz and up to 100 mW for accessories, never above the national limit for the band.", "Describes the 500 mW systems at 169 MHz as one transmitter installed at a fixed location in a large auditorium, such as a church or theatre, serving receivers connected to hearing aids by wire or induction, and notes they may need an individual licence.", "Gives an informative installation test for devices in 173.965-216 MHz: identify the local DAB channels, choose unused ones, install a test transmitter, then check DAB reception with a portable receiver at the site boundary, at the nearest house and outside a first-floor window.", "States that it is a testing standard based on spectrum use and includes no performance characteristics users may need." ], "limitations": "Tests spectrum use only: nothing on speech quality, coverage or the listening experience. Bands and power are set by CEPT and national rules (see ERC Recommendation 70-03). Version 2.1.1 (May 2017) was the latest in ETSI's public archive when read on 9 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "healthwatch-southampton-2017-hospital-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/healthwatch-southampton-2017-hospital-loops/", "title": "Hearing Loops at UHS FT: Audit of Hearing Loops", "authors": "Dymond HF, for the sensory loss group and Healthwatch Southampton", "publisher": "Healthwatch Southampton (reports library of Healthwatch England)", "date": "2017-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Local audit report (volunteer field checks)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Government (Healthwatch Southampton, the city's statutory health and social care watchdog, funded through the local authority; the audit was done by two of its volunteers with hearing loss, as members of University Hospital Southampton's sensory loss group)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://nds.healthwatch.co.uk/sites/default/files/reports_library/20170502_Southampton__Hearing-Loops-at-UHS-FT-Report.pdf", "summary": "Two deaf volunteers' checks of the hearing loops listed at a large English hospital trust, finding most not working or unknown to staff, with recommendations on responsibility, training and new loops.", "findings": [ "On 31 January 2017, Harry Dymond and Steve Beale, volunteers with hearing loss, visited locations with Sarah Halcrow and asked staff set questions. The Method describes Dymond listening through a telecoil and Beale through earbuds connected to a loop receiver. The Results say the chapel was tested separately by Dymond; its date and separate equipment are unstated. Therapies was not audited (Background, Method and Results, PDF page 3).", "Recommendations on PDF page 4 ask for a small volume increase at main reception and no further action at cardiothoracic/oncology. They identify C6 TYA and C7 Haematology day unit, say their loop types were unknown and recommend investigation, training and clearer signs; C6's sign was attached to movable equipment and C7's loop should remain on during reception hours. No separate listening result is supplied for C6 or C7.", "At Wellcome Trust CRF reception, staff thought a unit existed, but none was present. An electrical point suggested a counter loop; the visitors did not establish whether wire was installed under the counter (Recommendations, PDF page 4).", "The main reception loop worked and its staff knew it, though it had first been installed incorrectly and had to be reinstalled. The only working loop in a clinical area was a shared outpatient reception loop, which the same volunteers had earlier found not working and had shown staff how to use. The chapel's room loop worked, provided the lectern microphone was used.", "A therapies outpatient loop was reported faulty and was not tested; loops at two unit receptions needed investigation and staff training; at a research facility reception, staff believed a loop was present but no unit could be found.", "Recommended a named person responsible for loops, staff training, a record of each loop's location and regular tests, leaving reception loops on whenever reception is open, and new loops at receptions including the emergency department.", "Gave prices of about £100 for a portable loop and about £100 plus installation for a counter loop.", "Recommends a temporary portable loop for emergency-department reception, movable elsewhere once a fixed counter loop is installed, and the same approach at X-ray reception (Recommendations, PDF pages 4-5).", "Recommends recording loop locations, staff familiar with them and regular tests, with a named first contact for failures. It asks for more visible signs at C6 and C7, and for the C6 sign to be fixed somewhere other than movable equipment (Recommendations, PDF page 4).", "The introductory page identifies two Healthwatch Southampton Strategy Group members with hearing loss; the Method and Results sections describe their listening checks and the three working loops. The report gives no separate funding statement for this audit.", "The Method and Results sections say a questionnaire was completed at each location and the completed forms were submitted to the Head of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion; the report does not reproduce that instrument.", "Of four clinical reception locations checked, one had a working loop; two others were referred for investigation and staff training, and at the fourth it was unclear whether a loop unit existed.", "The Method and Results sections describe four clinical reception locations visited: cardiothoracic/oncology (one shared loop, working), C6, C7 and the Wellcome Trust facility (where no unit could be found). The therapies loop was reported faulty in advance and was not audited. This is a count of locations checked, not four confirmed installed loop units." ], "limitations": "A small, single-site audit by two volunteers, without published field-strength measurements; results were judged by listening. Its Method and Results sections describe set questions and a questionnaire completed at each location and submitted to the trust, but do not reproduce the questionnaire. The report does not identify funding for this particular audit; the funding label describes Healthwatch's organisational status. The report prints no date; two Healthwatch library entries give 1 and 2 May 2017, so month precision is retained. The Method section dates the accompanied visits to 31 January 2017; the chapel check is described separately without a date. Prices are the authors' estimates.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "service-counters", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "transport", "healthcare-settings", "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "listen-2017-wifi-latency", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2017-wifi-latency/", "title": "Understanding & Minimizing Wi-Fi Latency (Listen Tech-Note LTN0012)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2017-04-27", "kind": "Manufacturer technical note", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the ListenWiFi system described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/LTN0012_Wifi-Latency-Tech-Note_042717.pdf", "summary": "A three-page technical note from Listen Technologies on the delay of its ListenWiFi system to listeners' phones and how to reduce it.", "findings": [ "Gives the latency of its system to phones as 170-214 ms on Apple devices and 252-463 ms on Android devices, and says Apple devices typically perform better.", "Attributes most of the delay to the access point's transmission and to the phone's processing and playback, and says latency varies greatly with the phone's make and model, older models being slower.", "Names interference from nearby access points on similar channels, and encryption (a password on the access point), as factors that add delay. It advises choosing a clear channel with a Wi-Fi analyzer, placing the access point in the same room with a line of sight to listeners and at least 10 ft from other access points, and leaving it without a password.", "Written for TV audio: it notes that a TV's input lag (sometimes over 100 ms) and where the audio is taken from affect how well sound and picture line up, and that the server can delay audio by up to 3,000 ms when it runs ahead of the picture." ], "limitations": "The maker's own figures, without a method: the note does not say which phones or how many were tested, the network load, what the delay was measured between, or whether listening was wired or Bluetooth. It describes the 2017 system (PL-900 server and PL-301 access point), so later Listen systems may differ, and it addresses TV viewing rather than live speech in the room.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks" ] }, { "id": "iec-tr-63079-2017", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-tr-63079-2017/", "title": "IEC TR 63079:2017 Code of practice for hearing-loop systems (HLS)", "authors": "IEC TC 29 (Electroacoustics)", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "2017-04-10", "kind": "Technical report (code of practice)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission; the full text is sold, and only the abstract and a preview of the opening pages are public)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/32554", "summary": "The international code of practice for hearing loops: guidance on designing, planning, installing, testing, operating and maintaining a loop system.", "findings": [ "Gives recommendations and guidance on the design, planning, installation, testing, operation and maintenance of a hearing-loop system for speech, music or other signals.", "Is mainly concerned with loops for hearing enhancement, in which the signal reaches users of hearing aids fitted with magnetic pick-up coils (telecoils).", "Does not apply to induction-loop systems that use a carrier frequency, or to hearing enhancement systems that do not use magnetic induction.", "Is a technical report (guidance), unlike IEC 60118-4, which sets the performance requirements. The first edition runs to 103 pages and was amended in 2018 and 2020; the IEC lists 2029 as its stability date.", "Its contents list, in the free preview, includes clauses on verifying that the completed system delivers its intended performance (8.2), inspection and testing of wiring, commissioning, documentation, certification, acceptance and verification (13-18), owner responsibilities (signage, user feedback and staff training), operation and maintenance (routine testing, inspection and servicing, and a special inspection when a new maintenance organisation is appointed), and user responsibilities (a responsible person and a logbook), with annexes on monitoring receivers and model certificates for design, installation, commissioning, acceptance, optional verification, inspection and servicing, and modification.", "Its introduction says the document \"should not be quoted as if it were a specification and particular care should be taken to ensure that claims of compliance are not misleading\", and that anyone claiming to follow it should be able to justify departures from its recommendations.", "A standards vendor's catalogue (IHS) lists the UK code of practice BS 7594:2011 as withdrawn and superseded by PD IEC TR 63079:2017+A2:2020, the UK edition of this report.", "The catalogue lifecycle metadata dates Amendment 1 and consolidated edition 1.1 to 5 September 2018, and Amendment 2 and consolidated edition 1.2 to 1 April 2020. These dates do not identify particular technical changes in the unread amendments." ], "limitations": "Read from the IEC webstore abstract and the free preview on VDE Verlag's site (cover, contents, foreword, introduction, scope and the first definitions); the guidance itself is paywalled, so this record cannot say what it recommends on any specific point, and the preview shows no maintenance intervals or test limits. The BS 7594 supersession comes from a vendor listing, not from BSI.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "commissioning-tests", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "signage-and-awareness", "procurement" ] }, { "id": "bsi-2017-en-50849", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bsi-2017-en-50849/", "title": "BS EN 50849:2017: Sound systems for emergency purposes", "authors": "British Standards Institution; CENELEC", "publisher": "British Standards Institution", "date": "2017-03-31", "kind": "Standard (publisher overview)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (CENELEC standard published by the British Standards Institution)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/sound-systems-for-emergency-purposes", "summary": "The European emergency sound-system standard replaced EN 60849, with fire evacuation expressly excluded from its scope.", "findings": [ "The publisher overview describes performance requirements and test methods for emergency sound systems intended to protect life and mobilize occupants in indoor or outdoor areas, using voice announcements and attention or alarm tones.", "The overview expressly excludes sound systems used for fire evacuation, whether or not connected to a fire detection and fire alarm system.", "BSI states that EN 50849:2017 supersedes EN 60849:1998 and that its intelligibility-measurement annex was updated in line with EN 60268-16.", "The overview identifies system safety, technical requirements, software monitoring, installation, operation and speech intelligibility among the topics covered." ], "limitations": "Publisher overview only; the full standard was not read. The European replacement should not be described as a universal replacement for every fire-alarm application of the withdrawn IEC standard. No assistive-listening clause or technology approval is established by this page.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "nyc-2017-local-law-51", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nyc-2017-local-law-51/", "title": "Local Law No. 51 of 2017: induction loop systems in city capital projects (New York City Charter section 224.3)", "authors": "New York City Council", "publisher": "City of New York (Department of Buildings, local laws)", "date": "2017-03-21", "kind": "Regulation (city law)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (City of New York)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.nyc.gov/assets/buildings/local_laws/ll51of2017.pdf", "summary": "A New York City law requiring hearing loops in city-funded assembly projects, the hearing-loss symbol with a T at entrances and check-in desks, and a yearly online list of city sites with assistive listening.", "findings": [ "Requires each city capital project with a baseline construction cost of $950,000 or more that builds or rebuilds assembly areas to put an induction loop in at least one of them, or an alternative system that the mayor rules significantly more effective, and microloops at security, information or reception desks where people check in for events in a looped area.", "Requires the building entrance and those check-in areas to display the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss (figure 703.6.3.3 of ICC A117.1-2009) with a \"T\" in the lower right-hand corner to show that an induction loop is available, or a symbol for the alternative system.", "Requires directional signage to the assistive listening assembly area, with raised graphics and Braille, under the city building code.", "Required the city to post on its website by 1 July 2018, and to update yearly, the city-owned or city-run facilities where an assistive listening system (induction loop, infrared, FM or other) is available or being installed, with the type of system and the cost of new installations.", "Lets the mayor, after consulting experts on hearing disabilities and assistive listening and advocates for people who are hard of hearing, allow a newer technology as an alternative to a loop.", "Requires each city capital project with an estimated baseline construction cost of $950,000 or more that builds or rebuilds assembly areas to include an induction loop in at least one assembly area, plus microloops at security, information or reception desks used to check in people attending events there. Classrooms, first-responder facilities, courthouses and outdoor facilities such as stadiums are excluded.", "Exempts the reconstruction of an assembly area where the estimated cost of installing a loop or alternative system exceeds 5% of the project's baseline construction cost, which excludes the cost of the assistive listening system.", "Lets the Mayor exempt projects accounting for up to 20% of the capital dollars subject to the law each fiscal year, reporting the exemptions and their basis to the Council.", "Allows another system only where the Mayor, after consulting experts and advocates, finds a new technology \"significantly more effective\" than a loop.", "Requires the city to publish, and update every year, the city facilities with an induction loop, infrared, FM or other assistive listening system, the type of system, and \"the cost associated with installation of new assistive listening systems\".", "Section 2 makes the law effective on 1 January 2018 and applies it to projects whose construction-document approval applications are filed with the Department of Buildings on or after that date. The closing statement records mayoral approval on 21 March 2017.", "Section 224.3(a) defines baseline construction cost to exclude assistive-listening installation cost. Under 224.3(b), a loop must meet section N102 of Building Code Appendix N; an authorised alternative must meet Appendix N.", "Section 224.3(f) exempts construction or reconstruction of assembly areas not owned by the city when city funding is below 50% of estimated project cost, unless the project receives at least USD 1 million from the city treasury.", "Section 224.3(c) specifies directional signs with raised graphics and letters with Braille descriptors. Subdivision (i) provides for a mayoral rule authorising an alternative following the effectiveness finding and expert/advocate consultation." ], "limitations": "Applies only to qualifying city-funded projects in New York City, with exemptions (for example a reconstruction where a loop would cost more than 5% of the baseline cost). It sets no check that the signs or the list are accurate. Passed on 16 March 2017, approved on 21 March 2017 and in force from 1 January 2018. The city's published list, seen on 9 October 2026, says its data are self-reported by agencies and updated yearly (last update 2 January 2026).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "contacta-2017-portable-loop-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/contacta-2017-portable-loop-guide/", "title": "Portable Loop IL-PL20: Installation & User Guide", "authors": "Contacta Systems Ltd", "publisher": "Contacta Systems Ltd", "date": "2017-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer installation and user guide", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Contacta Systems Ltd, maker of the portable loop described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.contacta.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IL-PL20-Portable-Loop-Installation-User-Guide.pdf", "summary": "Instructions for a rechargeable desktop loop used for short conversations, including orientation, listener distance, charging and external microphones.", "findings": [ "Describes the IL-PL20 as a portable desktop loop for conversations between two people, movable between rooms (page 4).", "Places the unit between staff and the listener, with the built-in rear microphone facing staff and the front T-symbol facing the listener; the listener should be no more than 1.2 m away (pages 5-6).", "For unclear reception, asks staff to check charge, reposition the unit, check that the listener has selected the T setting and check hearing-device volume. An inactive telecoil or a fault in either device may prevent reception (page 6).", "For conversations involving more than two people, recommends a large-area loop, or an external boundary microphone if that is unavailable. The boundary microphone is placed towards the speakers; connecting an external device disables the internal microphone (page 7).", "States approximately four hours of operation from fully charged batteries; the unit can charge while operating, and should be left connected to the charger with its switch off when unused. An intermittent red light indicates low battery (page 8)." ], "limitations": "Instructions for one model, not an independent performance test. The distance and battery duration are manufacturer statements, without a measurement protocol or listener sample. The cover says March 2017; the later upload directory is not the publication date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "doj-2017-auxiliary-aids", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2017-auxiliary-aids/", "title": "28 CFR 36.303: auxiliary aids and services (ADA Title III regulation)", "authors": "US Department of Justice", "publisher": "eCFR", "date": "2017-01-18", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-28/section-36.303", "summary": "The ADA regulation that requires public accommodations to provide auxiliary aids, including assistive listening systems, where needed for effective communication.", "findings": [ "In the same regulation, section 36.104 defines public accommodations to include private undergraduate and postgraduate schools and other places of education, in category (10). This scope passage was read in the archived DOJ copy of the full Title III regulation.", "Lists \"assistive listening devices\" and \"assistive listening systems\" among the auxiliary aids and services for people who are deaf or hard of hearing.", "Requires a public accommodation to furnish appropriate auxiliary aids where necessary for effective communication, including with companions who have disabilities, unless doing so would fundamentally alter the service or cause an undue burden.", "Says the right aid depends on the person's way of communicating and on the nature, length, complexity and context of the communication; the business should consult the person whenever possible, but the final choice is the business's, provided it results in effective communication.", "Requires aids to be provided in accessible formats, in a timely manner, and in a way that protects the privacy and independence of the person with a disability.", "Appendix C to Part 36, in the discussion of section 36.303(b)(3), gives permanent or portable assistive listening systems at a hotel conference centre as equipment that may be required. This is explanatory text, read in the official DOJ reproduction at https://www.ada.gov/law-and-regs/regulations/title-iii-regulations/.", "Section 36.303(a)-(c) gives the general duty, examples of aids and rules for choosing an effective aid. These paragraphs do not select a venue listening technology or set receiver counts or numerical listening-system performance limits. Paragraphs (d)-(g) separately address telecommunications, caption decoders, video remote interpreting, and movie captioning and audio description, including device counts and performance requirements." ], "limitations": "The general effective-communication provisions in section 36.303(a)-(c) apply separately from the construction rules in the 2010 ADA Standards. Those general provisions do not select a venue listening technology or set receiver counts or numerical listening-system performance limits. This does not describe the separate requirements for other communication services in paragraphs (d)-(g). Date is the section's latest amendment shown by eCFR.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "privacy", "service-counters", "healthcare-settings", "hotels-and-conference-centres", "lecture-halls" ] }, { "id": "icc-2017-a117-1-assistive-listening", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/icc-2017-a117-1-assistive-listening/", "title": "ICC A117.1-2017 Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities, Section 706 Assistive Listening Systems", "authors": "International Code Council", "publisher": "International Code Council (ICC Digital Codes)", "date": "2017-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Technical standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Code Council)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/icca117-12017/chapter-7-communication-elements-and-features", "summary": "The technical standard that the 2024 International Building Code references for assistive listening equipment.", "findings": [ "Requires receivers to have a 1/8 inch (3.2 mm) standard monaural jack, and receivers that must be hearing-aid compatible to work with hearing-aid telecoils through neck loops.", "Section 706.3 requires induction loop systems, where provided, to meet IEC 60118-4 as listed in section 106.2.2.", "Sets performance limits for assistive listening systems: 110 to 118 dB SPL with a 50 dB volume range, at least 18 dB signal-to-noise ratio for internally generated noise, and no more than 18 dB of peak clipping relative to the peaks of speech.", "Section 706.3 explicitly addresses induction-loop systems; section 706 does not mention Bluetooth or Auracast." ], "limitations": "Applies through the building code that adopts it; the 2024 IBC references the 2017 edition. Section 706 does not print a measurement procedure for its limits, but refers induction-loop systems to IEC 60118-4. Date shows the edition year only. This audit read the archived section 706 excerpts; the saved publisher HTML is a page shell, not the full standard.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "audio-level", "which-technology", "loop-verification", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "doj-2016-movie-theaters-final-rule", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2016-movie-theaters-final-rule/", "title": "Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations: Movie Theaters; Movie Captioning and Audio Description (final rule)", "authors": "US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division", "publisher": "Federal Register 81(232), pp. 87348-87387 (GovInfo)", "date": "2016-12-02", "kind": "Regulation (final rule with its preamble)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice, which issues the ADA Title III regulation)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-12-02/html/2016-28644.htm", "summary": "The Justice Department's rule adding captioning and audio description duties for US cinemas to the ADA Title III regulation, with its account of how these sit beside the existing assistive listening rules and of the comments it received.", "findings": [ "States that the rule's requirements are in addition to a movie theater's existing obligation to provide assistive listening systems and receivers under sections 219 and 706 of the 2010 ADA Standards.", "Says assistive listening receivers are effective for people who are hard of hearing and who only require sound amplification, but do not provide effective communication for people who are deaf or for whom amplification is insufficient; for them the rule requires closed captioning.", "Requires at least one audio description device for every two auditoriums showing digital movies, and no fewer than two per theater; a theater may meet this with the assistive listening receivers it already has under Table 219.3 \"if those receivers have a minimum of two channels available for sound transmission to patrons\".", "Reports that the Department had expected many theaters to use multi-channel assistive listening receivers, so that most would need no extra devices; a couple of theaters said they had dual-channel receivers, while a trade association said many theaters still rely on single-channel headsets. The Department adds that it does not intend the provision to discourage theaters from using induction loop systems for sound amplification with a different system for audio description.", "Describes audio description as recorded narration carried on the audio channels of the digital cinema package and delivered from a server via infrared, FM or Wi-Fi to headsets at patrons' seats.", "Requires at least one employee on location whenever captioned or described digital movies are shown who can quickly locate, activate and operate the equipment, address problems with it and explain its use to patrons. Commenters reported visits when no staff knew where the captioning devices were kept or how to turn on captioning or audio description.", "Reports, from comments, that a trade association's member companies had signed out at most 1 to 4 audio description devices at any time and never had more requests than devices, and that device data from five cinema companies, offered by the theater owners' association (NATO), showed that demand for captioning devices rarely, if ever, exceeded supply.", "Requires captioning devices by number of auditoriums showing digital movies (4 for one auditorium, 6 for 2-7, 8 for 8-15 and 12 for 16 or more). The rule took effect on 17 January 2017, with equipment required in existing digital auditoriums by 2 June 2018; it defers any requirement for auditoriums that show only analog film.", "The preamble (section 36.303(g)(4)) states the Department's \"belief that most movie theaters utilize multi-channel headsets\", and asks that new devices be compatible with the theater's audio description and assistive listening systems." ], "limitations": "A rule on captioning and audio description: it changes no assistive listening requirement, and its statements about receivers, loops and staff come from the preamble and from comments, not from data the Department collected. The usage figures are commenters' own and concern captioning and audio description devices, not assistive listening receivers. The text was read in the Federal Register's HTML edition on GovInfo.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "delaware-2016-telecoil-notice", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/delaware-2016-telecoil-notice/", "title": "An Act to Amend Title 24 of the Delaware Code Relating to Hearing Aids (Chapter 315, formerly House Bill No. 402)", "authors": "Delaware General Assembly (148th General Assembly)", "publisher": "Delaware General Assembly, Session Laws", "date": "2016-07-19", "kind": "Regulation (state law)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (State of Delaware)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://legis.delaware.gov/SessionLaws/Chapter?id=15873", "summary": "A Delaware law directing the licensing board to require hearing aid dispensers and audiologists to tell clients about telecoils and hearing loops at the first fitting examination and to give written information.", "findings": [ "Adds to the board's powers and duties in § 3706(a), Title 24, a duty to establish requirements for licensed hearing aid dispensers and audiologists to tell the prospective purchaser or client, at the initial examination for fitting and sale of a hearing aid, about the operation and benefits of telecoil technology when using a hearing aid with hearing loop technology.", "Also requires written information explaining the telecoil and its uses, including access to telephones, communication with businesses and in the community, and \"noninvasive access to assistive listening systems\".", "Took effect 90 days after its approval on 19 July 2016." ], "limitations": "One US state. The law sets a duty to inform, not to fit, activate or verify a telecoil, and no data on how it is followed were found. Other states' laws were not read here; a loop advocate counted nine states with such requirements in 2020 (Frazier 2020, a separate record).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting", "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "magann-faivre-2016", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/magann-faivre-2016/", "title": "Effects of Hearing Loop Systems on Speech Understanding and Sound Quality of Normal-hearing Listeners and Hearing Aid Users", "authors": "Magann Faivre R, Ismail F, Sterkens J, Thunder T, Chung K", "publisher": "Hearing Review 23(8):28", "date": "2016-07-18", "kind": "Field study (lecture hall), trade journal article", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Manufacturer (the authors state the research was funded by GN ReSound, a hearing aid maker, and Listen Technologies, an assistive listening and loop maker, together with the David & Carol Myers Foundation, the family foundation of loop advocate David Myers; study run at Northern Illinois University; co-author Juliëtte Sterkens is a hearing loop advocate whose outreach that foundation funds)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://hearingreview.com/hearing-products/testing-equipment/effects-hearing-loop-systems-speech-understanding-sound-quality-normal-hearing-listeners-hearing-aid-users", "summary": "A loop-on versus loop-off test of speech understanding and rated sound quality for hearing aid users and normal-hearing listeners in a reverberant university lecture hall.", "findings": [ "Hearing loop calibration reports measuring magnetic field strength, signal frequency response and electrical noise within the looped area using a field-strength meter with its telecoil vertical. No numerical results for those three checks appear in the readable article. The 43 dBA figure in Testing Site is acoustic room noise.", "Hearing loop calibration describes the 7 × 3 m test wire taped to the lecture-hall floor; it does not establish coverage of the entire 120-seat room. The Acknowledgements credit Steve Thunder of Assistive Hearing Systems LLC for installation help and continuing technical support. The article does not explicitly identify the hall's location or experiment dates.", "The Methods subsection on speech recognition testing says HINT scores counted correctly identified words in sentence lists. The reported percentages are word-correct scores, rather than the percentage of complete sentences repeated correctly.", "The Acknowledgements say portions of the work were presented on 7 October 2013. The article’s 2016 publication year should not be treated as the year the experiment took place.", "A 7 × 3 m perimeter loop, installed to IEC standards, covered the test area of a 120-seat lecture hall with 0.9 s reverberation time, 43 dBA background noise and a steel-reinforced concrete floor.", "Participants were 26 bilateral hearing aid users aged 35 to 77 (mean 64) with telecoils, from the university's hearing clinic, whose telecoil programs were added or checked in the clinic beforehand, and 45 normal-hearing listeners aged 18 to 59.", "With HINT sentences at -3 dB SNR, hearing aid users scored 14% correct with the loop off and 88% with it on; at +3 dB SNR, 52% and 89%. Normal-hearing listeners went from 62% to 98% and from 89% to 99%.", "Both groups rated listening effort, sound quality, pleasantness and naturalness significantly better with the loop on, for speech, music and television clips; loudness ratings did not differ, which the authors attribute to a rating scale that did not say whether louder was better.", "All but one participant preferred listening through the loop; 9 of 10 hearing aid users said they were likely to use a loop where one is installed, and over half of each group said they would pay $50 to $500 for a telecoil." ], "limitations": "One room and one loop; the comparison is loop against the hearing aid's own microphones about 6 m from the loudspeaker, not against other assistive listening systems. Published in a trade journal rather than a peer-reviewed journal. Two of the three funders make hearing aids or loop systems, the third funds loop advocacy, and one author is a loop advocate. Whether listeners knew which condition they were in is not reported.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "listener-preference", "loop-limits", "telecoil-fitting", "cochlear-implants", "lecture-halls" ] }, { "id": "cara-2016-parish-disabilities", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cara-2016-parish-disabilities/", "title": "Disabilities in Parishes Across the United States: How Parishes in the United States Accommodate and Serve People with Disabilities (CARA Special Report)", "authors": "Holland J, Gilger P, Gaunt TP (Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate)", "publisher": "Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA), Georgetown University", "date": "2016-07-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Paper (survey of a national random sample of Catholic parishes)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, a research centre affiliated with Georgetown University; commissioned and funded by Potomac Community Resources, the National Catholic Partnership on Disability, the Archdiocese of Washington's Department of Special Needs and Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://cara.georgetown.edu/s/PCR-Special-Report-on-Disabilities-FINAL.pdf", "summary": "A national survey of US Catholic pastors on how their parishes include people with disabilities, including how many offer assistive listening devices.", "findings": [ "About the Study says questionnaires went by email and post to pastors or people entrusted with parish pastoral care, followed by repeated reminders. It reports 1,760 unusable addresses, explaining the reduction from 7,002 sampled parishes to 5,242 successfully contacted.", "Reports that 36% of parishes have assistive listening devices that parishioners can use, that larger parishes are significantly more likely than smaller ones to have them, and that parishes where people with disabilities take part in adult formation are much more likely to have them.", "79% of pastors know of someone in their parish with a sensory disability, and 96% of someone with an aging-related disability.", "A further one in five pastors say additional audio or visual resources are something they would like to provide; written answers ask for financial help to buy hearing devices for people with hearing loss.", "Asked for their parish's best accommodation, one pastor named its hearing loop, writing that some people attend Mass there because of it; another named assistive listening devices in church and in the confessional.", "Drew a stratified random sample of 7,002 parishes; 5,242 could be reached and 789 pastors responded (15%), which the report puts at a margin of error of 3.22 percent." ], "limitations": "A 15% response rate, and answers come from pastors rather than parishioners. The survey does not say which assistive listening technologies parishes use, whether they work or how often they are used, and it covers Catholic parishes only. The report is undated; its file was created in July 2016 and it quotes a June 2016 homily.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "sui-2016", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sui-2016/", "title": "Characterizing and improving WiFi latency in large-scale operational networks", "authors": "Sui K, Zhou M, Liu D, Ma M, Pei D, Zhao Y, Li Z, Moscibroda T", "publisher": "MobiSys '16 (ACM International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services), Singapore", "date": "2016-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed conference paper (network measurement study)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Tsinghua University, with one author from Microsoft Research; supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China and other Chinese government research grants)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2906388.2906393", "summary": "A measurement study using round-trip timing over the last, wireless hop of a university campus Wi-Fi network, across more than 47,000 user devices, and of what makes that delay long.", "findings": [ "Measured Wi-Fi latency on the Tsinghua University campus network for more than 47,000 devices. The distribution of one-minute average round-trip measurements had a long tail: the median was about 3 ms, the 90th percentile about 20 ms and the 99th percentile about 250 ms.", "Measured Wi-Fi latency on the Tsinghua University campus network for more than 47,000 devices. The ping round-trip delay had a long tail: the median was about 3 ms, the 90th percentile about 20 ms and the 99th percentile about 250 ms.", "75% of devices had at least one episode in a week in which their average Wi-Fi latency stayed above 20 ms for more than a minute.", "The most informative indicators of Wi-Fi latency were channel utilisation, the number of devices online and the signal-to-noise ratio; received signal strength, commonly used to choose an access point, was less informative.", "On this campus the 5 GHz band had 35% lower average latency than 2.4 GHz, which the authors link to half as many devices using it and lower channel utilisation; devices' default band selection favoured 2.4 GHz.", "Moving devices to access points suggested by the authors' latency model more than halved latency for 72% of the over 1,000 devices that used the service for 2.5 months; adding a 5 GHz-only network and denser access points also helped.", "Section 2.1 defines ping2 as two consecutive pings from a wired server to a user device: the first wakes the device and the second round-trip time supplies the measurement. Six measurements, taken ten seconds apart, are averaged into each one-minute latency record. The authors regard the wired portion as negligible because its 99th percentile was below 1 ms. The reported distribution therefore describes minute-average round-trip measurements, not one-way audio delivery.", "Section 2.1 defines the measured result as the second ping round-trip time (RTT2) after a wake-up ping; the wired portion was treated as negligible (99th percentile under 1 ms). Each stored latency record averages six readings over a minute. These are not one-way audio-packet transit times." ], "limitations": "A general study of one campus data network, not of audio streaming or assistive listening: it estimates the wireless-hop round-trip delay using a second ping after a wake-up ping, not the audio buffering, codecs or phone playback that add to a stream's delay, and reports no audio results. Wi-Fi equipment has changed since 2016. Read in the authors' copy hosted by Microsoft Research; the ACM page is the published version.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "lsi-2016-ideas-for-ears-survey", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/lsi-2016-ideas-for-ears-survey/", "title": "Hearing-impaired theatre goers disappointed says survey", "authors": "Evans J", "publisher": "Lighting & Sound International (LSi Online)", "date": "2016-05-31", "kind": "News article (trade press report of a survey)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (survey by Ideas for Ears, which the article calls a specialist social enterprise; reported by a trade magazine; who paid for the survey is not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://lsionline.co.uk/news/hearing-impaired-theatre-goers-disappointed-says-survey--m7402i", "summary": "A trade-press report of a UK survey of 143 people with hearing loss about going to theatres and concerts, including which assistive listening system they prefer.", "findings": [ "Reports that 143 people with mild to profound hearing loss completed the survey; 94% said their hearing had led to a poor experience at theatres or concerts, and 83% had been disappointed because the right provision was not available.", "Reports that 77% preferred an induction loop to an infrared or FM system.", "Lists the improvements respondents chose: less background music during speech (73%), an assistive listening system (66%), clear speech (65%), captions (64%) and more volume (25%); staff speaking clearly and facing the person was named as the change that would make the greatest single difference, at the ticket office (71%) and with ushers (67%)." ], "limitations": "A news report of a survey whose method, recruitment, dates and question wording are not given; the full report was not found, as the organisation's survey page no longer loads. The sample is small. The page was updated on 14 December 2016.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "listener-preference", "infrared-limits", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "london-assembly-2016-sensory-travel", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/london-assembly-2016-sensory-travel/", "title": "Leading the way: Travelling with a sensory impairment in London", "authors": "London Assembly Transport Committee", "publisher": "Greater London Authority", "date": "2016-03-18", "kind": "Field observation and committee inquiry report", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Government (London Assembly, the elected body that scrutinises the Mayor of London and Transport for London)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.london.gov.uk/assembly-publications/leading-way-travelling-sensory-impairment-london", "summary": "A London Assembly committee's investigation into travel in London with a sensory impairment, including a site visit on which the committee's chair rode a new bus with two hearing aid users and observed problems with its hearing loop.", "findings": [ "Gathered written submissions from operators and sensory impairment organisations, views from individuals through an online survey, email and phone, a formal meeting on 9 March 2016, and a site visit on which the committee's chair shadowed two hearing aid users on a bus journey on a new Routemaster route.", "On that bus, the chair observed that electrical interference produced an unpleasant buzz, particularly behind the driver's cab where there is an electrical cabinet, and that the loop had a very limited reach: people could hear it only in the priority seats nearest the middle door, and not in those across the aisle.", "Reports that in London the bus loop wire covers a specific area of the bus rather than the whole bus, that only newer buses have a loop, and that some buses, including the new Routemaster, had no loop sign at the door, only a small sign set back inside.", "Quotes Action on Hearing Loss telling the committee that loops are often installed but not working properly, with interference or a shorter range than they should have, or without signs, and that loops need to be installed, maintained, advertised and understood by staff. A passenger with a hearing impairment described \"a constant synchronised electronic whine that matches the speed of the bus engine\".", "Reports that TfL was exploring with hearing impaired people how to address the interference, reposition the loops and increase their range, and recommends that TfL improve loop signs inside buses (showing where the loop works best) and outside (showing whether the bus has a loop).", "Appendix B, printed p. 27, dates the committee chair’s site visit, including the bus journey, to 25 February 2016. The two-hearing-aid-user sample is stated on pp. 6-7; the spatial reception and interference observations appear on p. 20." ], "limitations": "A political committee's report built from submissions, an online survey whose size is not given, and one bus journey observed by listening; no field-strength measurements. London buses in 2016 only. Read from the report PDF (www.london.gov.uk/media/51707/download), which matches the publication page.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "din-2016-18041", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/din-2016-18041/", "title": "DIN 18041:2016-03: Hörsamkeit in Räumen – Anforderungen, Empfehlungen und Hinweise für die Planung", "authors": "DIN", "publisher": "DIN; DIN Media", "date": "2016-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Room-acoustics standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (DIN acoustics standards committee)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.dinmedia.de/de/norm/din-18041/245356770", "summary": "German room-acoustics requirements distinguish room use, volume and inclusive communication; informative annexes discuss assistive listening.", "findings": [ "Group A addresses communication over medium and longer distances; Group B addresses shorter distances. The scope excludes specialist theatres, concert halls, cinemas and worship spaces.", "Table 1 identifies A3 for inclusive speech/presentation and A4 for inclusive teaching/communication. Clause 4.2.3 sets volume-dependent reverberation targets and frequency tolerances; A4 is for volumes below 500 m³.", "Clause 4.2.3 bases Group A reverberation targets on 80% of normal occupancy, with conversion between occupied and unoccupied conditions under Annex A and consideration of lower occupancy where expected.", "Clause 4.2.1 seeks direct sound and useful reflections within 50 ms while reducing late reflections and noise. Informative Annex E.7 says ordinary loudspeaker systems are generally insufficient for people with hearing loss; direct listening systems may be needed even without a public-address system.", "Clause 4.3.1 (page 14) recommends room damping for Group B to reduce background noise and reverberance, expressed as equivalent sound absorption area divided by room volume over 250–2,000 Hz. Group A reverberation targets should not be applied to Group B as if they were the same criterion.", "Informative Annex D (page 29) says installing a loudspeaker system does not reduce the reverberation-time requirements and that meeting a reverberation target alone does not prove adequate speech intelligibility; Annex E.7 adds direct listening provision for people with hearing loss." ], "limitations": "Read the publisher overview and the DIN accessibility portal’s full standard with editorial accessibility additions, retrieved through Wayback after a direct 403. The editorial appendix is separate from the standard. Annexes E and F are informative; this record does not establish local legal duties. Predates Auracast.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "anc-ioa-2015-school-acoustics", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/anc-ioa-2015-school-acoustics/", "title": "Acoustics of Schools: a design guide", "authors": "Institute of Acoustics; Association of Noise Consultants", "publisher": "Institute of Acoustics and Association of Noise Consultants", "date": "2015-11-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Professional design guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (joint publication of the Institute of Acoustics and Association of Noise Consultants; the acknowledgements name Education Funding Agency advice)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.association-of-noise-consultants.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Acoustics-of-Schools-a-design-guide-November-2015.pdf", "summary": "The school design guide recommends considering loops or infrared in large halls, particularly for visitors, and stresses listening conditions throughout a school.", "findings": [ "Section 6.8.2, pages 69–70, recommends considering induction loops or infrared in large assembly rooms, halls, performance spaces and meeting rooms, primarily for visitors; it assumes pupils normally have personal listening equipment.", "The same section describes connecting an existing public-address output to a loop amplifier and warns that loop signals can spill into adjacent areas.", "Section 6.10, page 71, identifies assembly areas, sports halls and gyms as important communication spaces; it describes large assembly and sports halls as particularly difficult settings for inclusion that require careful design.", "Section 6.8.4, page 70, recommends seeking advice so that all school public spaces meet special hearing needs. Section 6.10, page 71, places staff training alongside better acoustics in an inclusive school approach.", "The guide accompanies the revised BB93 performance standards and replaces design guidance in sections 2–7 of the 2003 edition." ], "limitations": "Professional guidance, not a blanket legal requirement to install a particular system. Predates Auracast. Its personal microphones and classroom sound-field discussion is outside this record’s venue-system use.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "levy-2015-extended-bandwidth", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/levy-2015-extended-bandwidth/", "title": "Extended high-frequency bandwidth improves reception of speech in spatially separated masking speech", "authors": "Levy SC, Freed DJ, Nilsson M, Moore BCJ, Puria S", "publisher": "Ear and Hearing 36(5):e214-e224", "date": "2015-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (laboratory bandwidth comparison)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Manufacturer (EarLens-affiliated research, partly supported by NIH/NIDCD SBIR grant R44 DC008499 to EarLens Corporation; the authors declare financial interests in EarLens)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4549240/", "summary": "Compared sentence reception with 4, 6, 8 and 10 kHz bandwidths in spatially separated competing speech.", "findings": [ "The bandwidth experiments included 25 adults with symmetric mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss and 24 with normal hearing. Listeners with hearing loss used individually adjusted simulated amplification through insert earphones.", "Increasing bandwidth from 4 to 10 kHz improved the mean sentence reception threshold by 1.3 dB with target and maskers on opposite sides, and 0.5 dB with diffuse masking, for listeners with hearing loss. The effect across conditions was significant.", "Normal-hearing listeners benefited more, with about 3 dB improvement. The authors call for tests with other maskers and reverberation." ], "limitations": "Shared evidence about audible bandwidth, not a venue transmission-system comparison. All recorded talkers were male; hearing-loss and normal-hearing groups used different presentation arrangements. Read the full author manuscript in PMC. The date uses the September-October 2015 journal issue, with month precision.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "statcan-2015-hearing-prevalence", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/statcan-2015-hearing-prevalence/", "title": "Prevalence of hearing loss among Canadians aged 20 to 79: Audiometric results from the 2012/2013 Canadian Health Measures Survey", "authors": "Feder K, Michaud D, Ramage-Morin P, McNamee J, Beauregard Y", "publisher": "Statistics Canada, Health Reports 26(7)", "date": "2015-07-15", "kind": "Paper (government survey analysis)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Government (Statistics Canada publication using the Canadian Health Measures Survey)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82-003-x/2015007/article/14206-eng.htm", "summary": "A nationally weighted analysis of 2,972 Canadian adults comparing measured hearing loss with self-reported difficulty and hearing aid use.", "findings": [ "The final sample comprised 2,972 adults aged 20-79 with results for both ears, representing 23.7 million people. The overall survey response rate was 51.7%.", "Defines speech-frequency hearing loss as a pure-tone average greater than 25 dB in the worse ear across 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz, including unilateral and bilateral loss.", "Measured speech-frequency hearing loss affected 19% of adults aged 20-79: 12% had mild and 7% moderate or worse loss. Prevalence was no more than 10% below age 50 and 65% at ages 70-79.", "Fewer than 4% self-reported hearing difficulty using the Health Utilities Index questions, substantially below the measured prevalence.", "About 12% of adults with measured hearing loss used hearing aids; this estimate is flagged for cautious interpretation because of sampling variability. About 25% with moderate or severe loss used hearing aids.", "The original HTML metadata gives the issue date as 15 July 2015; its footer gives a later modification date." ], "limitations": "Data are from 2012/2013, not current audience observations. Excludes institutional residents, territories, reserves and certain other groups; some ear conditions and cochlear implants also excluded people from testing. Sample weights address the survey design but do not make venue audiences representative of the general population. Some hearing aid estimates carry high sampling variability.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "alfakir-2015", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/alfakir-2015/", "title": "Evaluation of Speech Perception via the Use of Hearing Loops and Telecoils", "authors": "Alfakir R, Holmes AE, Kricos PB, Gaeta L, Martin S", "publisher": "Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine 1:2333721415591935 (SAGE)", "date": "2015-07-08", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (lecture hall, older adults)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (University of Florida and University of Oklahoma; the authors report no financial support and no conflicts of interest; Contacta, a loop maker, lent the field strength meter)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5119799/", "summary": "A small randomized repeated-measures study comparing speech understanding through hearing aid microphones and through telecoils with an installed hearing loop, in quiet and in noise.", "findings": [ "The Method's second paragraph describes six randomly chosen seating locations, positions measured from a reference point in the room centre, and field-strength checks with a Contacta Loop-FSM before the study. It reports all six within ±3 dB and cites ANSI/ISA-62382-2012; this is the article's stated reference, not a verified identification of the applicable hearing-loop standard. The Acknowledgments confirm Contacta lent the meter.", "The Method says participants were recruited from a retirement community centre. The Discussion opening paragraph explicitly places the looped lecture hall at that centre; the article does not name the centre or state its country or measurement dates.", "Twelve experienced hearing aid users aged 62 to 89, recruited from a retirement community, sat in a lecture hall with an installed loop whose field strength measured within ±3 dB at six seats. Ten had working telecoils; the other two had hearing aids without a telecoil option and used a loop receiver for the telecoil conditions (Method).", "Words (CNC) and sentences (BKB) were presented at 70 dB SPL in quiet and with multi-talker babble at +10 dB SNR (measured at the centre of the seating), in random order, with each participant's microphone and telecoil settings.", "Mean word scores in noise rose from 25% with the microphone to 79% with the telecoil, and in quiet from 64% to 84%; sentence scores in noise rose from 83% to 99%. The telecoil advantage was statistically significant in both quiet and noise.", "Participants rated listening effort lower and confidence in their answers higher with the telecoil. Seating position affected scores; from earlier work in the same room, the authors estimated the acoustic SNR at about +6 dB in the front seats and +15 dB in the back seats.", "The authors recommend that telecoils be offered to older hearing aid users and that audiologists advocate for more loops in public places." ], "limitations": "Twelve participants from one community, of whom only seven returned for the second session; no audiometric data were available; one hall and one loop. The study compares a loop with the hearing aid microphone, not with other assistive listening systems, and does not report how the telecoil programs were set.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "listener-preference", "loop-verification", "telecoil-fitting", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "cept-2015-ecc-report-230", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cept-2015-ecc-report-230/", "title": "ECC Report 230: Harmonisation possibilities for assistive listening devices in the band 174-216 MHz", "authors": "CEPT Electronic Communications Committee (ECC), Working Group Frequency Management", "publisher": "European Communications Office (ECO Documentation Database)", "date": "2015-05-22", "kind": "Regulatory report (CEPT compatibility study)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (CEPT, the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations, whose Electronic Communications Committee brings together national spectrum regulators; the coexistence measurements were made by EHIMA, the European hearing instrument manufacturers' association, at Ofcom's laboratory in the UK)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://docdb.cept.org/document/336", "summary": "The European regulators' study behind the 173.965-216 MHz entry for assistive listening devices: how analogue FM devices can share the band with digital radio (DAB) and wireless microphones, and how 20 national regulators authorised them in 2014.", "findings": [ "Studies analogue FM assistive listening devices with 10 mW e.r.p. and channels up to 50 kHz wide (mostly 25 kHz), used mainly in schools, as candidates for licence-exempt use of unused channels in 174-216 MHz, to relieve congestion in 173.35-175.05 MHz.", "Expects these devices to lose use of spectrum above 173.95 MHz where DAB block 5A is planned, cutting access to some 22 of a previous 35 channels.", "Concludes from measurements that a device should operate at least 300 kHz from the edge of an occupied DAB channel, that it needs a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio of about 40 dB, and proposes a DAB field-strength threshold of 35 dBµV/m to protect a DAB receiver 1.5 m away; it gives a site test with a portable DAB receiver at the site boundary, the nearest house and outside a first-floor window.", "States that these devices are secondary and unprotected, cannot claim protection, and must move to other free channels if DAB channel use changes.", "Says wireless microphones in the band (typically 50 mW e.r.p.) tend to interfere with assistive listening devices before the reverse, that the two are usually not used at the same site, and that where they are, a local frequency plan can handle it.", "Observed that the devices' signals stayed \"more or less limited to the building\" and its close surroundings, and were not noticeable under normal circumstances in neighbouring buildings tens of metres away; where several systems share a building, each is usually run below 10 mW to avoid mutual interference.", "Reports typical installations of 20 to 40 channels and a largest reported installation of 110 channels of 25 kHz, and states that the systems are not expected to become digital in the foreseeable future, because FM's capture ratio allows closer frequency re-use and digital systems add latency.", "In a 2014 questionnaire, 20 administrations answered: 13 used general authorisations up to 50 mW e.r.p., 4 individual authorisations, 1 general authorisation with mandatory registration, 1 a mix, and Norway none; only Denmark and Finland reported an interference case each, one of them at a school for hearing-impaired children, which the respondent put down to bad frequency planning." ], "limitations": "Its scenario is analogue FM in schools, much of it personal systems worn by pupils, rather than venue installations, though the band conditions it proposed apply to both. The measurements were made in one conference room at Ofcom's laboratory in October 2014, with interference judged by ear, by the hearing instrument makers' association. National entries reflect 2014. The executive summary writes EN 300 442 where the body cites EN 300 422. The cover says approved May 2015; the date is the publication date in the ECO database.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "paulley-2015-court-mediation", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/paulley-2015-court-mediation/", "title": "I sued the Courts… and won", "authors": "Doug Paulley", "publisher": "Doug Paulley’s blog", "date": "2015-05-06", "kind": "Article (first-person case account)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (claimant’s own account; funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.kingqueen.org.uk/i-sued-the-courts-and-won/", "summary": "A claimant’s account of two disputes with the Ministry of Justice distinguishes an earlier settlement from a later mixed Equality Act outcome concerning mediation and hearing access in England.", "findings": [ "The post was published on 6 May 2015 and says the trial and verdict occurred that day. It identifies Paulley v Ministry of Justice, Deputy District Judge Branchflower and Harrogate County Court; the underlying access incidents occurred at Leeds County Court.", "Paulley reports an earlier settlement, including compensation, after a hearing with several access problems, among them no hearing loop. The account does not state the compensation amount or any binding requirement to install a loop.", "For the later mediation, Paulley reports that a loop was not set up, a directional listener was offered, and a larger loop kit arrived but was not installed during the allotted session. The mediator moved to sit directly in front of Paulley, and the mediation succeeded.", "According to Paulley’s paraphrase of the judgment, most complaints failed because face-to-face mediation eventually occurred, the alternative room was accessible and the mediator could be heard.", "Paulley reports an Equality Act 2010 finding of discrimination and damages for injury to feelings over the service’s initial insistence on telephone mediation and refusal to consider alternatives. The post gives no numeric damages award and reports no order to install a loop." ], "limitations": "A participant’s account, not a judgment transcript or independently checked court order. The page gives a later update of 19 April 2018 without explaining changes. The reported success concerned the initial refusal of an alternative to telephone mediation; it must not be described as a court victory requiring a loop. Neither settlement terms nor exact damages could be checked against an order.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "complaints-and-cases" ] }, { "id": "wittich-2015-device-usability", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/wittich-2015-device-usability/", "title": "Usability of assistive listening devices by older adults with low vision", "authors": "Wittich W, Southall K, Johnson A", "publisher": "Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology (Taylor & Francis), 11(7), 564-571", "date": "2015-05-06", "kind": "Paper (device usability study; abstract only)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (university and rehabilitation-centre researchers in Montreal; funding is not stated in the available abstract or indexed metadata)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/17483107.2015.1042076", "summary": "A study of 60 older adults tests whether brief instruction and practice help people with low vision operate assistive devices.", "findings": [ "Participants aged 60-100 comprised 23 people with low vision, 25 with combined hearing and vision loss, and 12 controls. Tasks included assembling a pocket talker and operating a talking clock and amplified telephone, with minimal or no instruction.", "Among participants with sensory loss, task completion without errors ranged from 20% to 95% depending on the device, task complexity and instruction. Instruction and repetition each had a statistically significant beneficial effect, but neither produced universal success on any device.", "The authors identify device visibility, cognitive and motor task complexity, and manual dexterity as potential barriers needing further investigation. They recommend attention to visibility, hand-eye coordination and dexterity when assigning devices." ], "limitations": "Only the journal abstract and bibliographic metadata, indexed by Europe PMC, were readable. Publisher and PubMed pages returned 403; Wayback had no copy of the publisher URL. Full methods, funding and device-specific results could not be checked. These were personal assistive devices, not venue systems; the evidence is relevant only to the shared task of handling equipment and learning its controls, and cannot rank venue technologies. Date is first online publication; the journal issue is October 2016.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "using-each-system" ] }, { "id": "healthwatch-cornwall-2015-hospital-hearing-loss", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/healthwatch-cornwall-2015-hospital-hearing-loss/", "title": "Report on the Changes and Current Issues at Royal Cornwall Hospital around Patients with Hearing Loss", "authors": "Healthwatch Cornwall", "publisher": "Healthwatch Cornwall CIC (reports library of Healthwatch England)", "date": "2015-04-09", "kind": "Local visit report (watchdog field check)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Government (Healthwatch Cornwall CIC, the county's statutory health and social care watchdog; the work followed issues raised by one of its volunteers who has hearing loss and a meeting with the hospital trust's equality lead)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://nds.healthwatch.co.uk/sites/default/files/reports_library/Healthwatch%20Cornwall%20-%20Hearing-Loss-Report-RCHT-V3.pdf", "summary": "A local watchdog's visit to two receptions, a ward and a diagnostic unit at Royal Cornwall Hospital, reporting on newly placed personal hearing sets and a reception loop that worked poorly.", "findings": [ "The loop-system bullet on PDF pages 1-2 identifies Treliske's main reception as Trelawney and compares it with outpatients reception. It attributes testing to Healthwatch Cornwall without naming the individual loop tester. The introduction names Jamie Hanlon as a volunteer who raised access concerns; it does not explicitly identify Hanlon as that tester. The heading dates the report 9 April 2015, without a separate visit date.", "The hospital had placed 50 new personal hearing sets around the hospital so that hard of hearing patients without hearing aids could talk with health professionals, friends and family. Healthwatch suggested adding a loop option for hearing aid users, more staff awareness, a map of where the sets are kept, and \"consideration of cross contamination and infection control\" of the sets.", "Testing the recently updated loop at the main reception, Healthwatch found it working \"but not as well as it should be\": with a clip-on lapel microphone, the sound reaching the hearing aid was poor, and with the background noise the loop \"almost becomes useless\". The outpatients department had a similar issue.", "The outpatients loop sign was hidden behind a box, and staff at the two reception desks visited were not suitably trained to use the loop. Healthwatch asked for the lapel microphone to be clipped to the receptionist, or a different microphone, for bigger and more prominent signs, and for training for all staff behind any reception desk.", "Reported other barriers: patients unsure and anxious about being called in the waiting area, a ward buzzer entry system whose reply they could not hear, an unstaffed MRI reception where patients had to telephone the unit, and staff commands such as \"breathe in\" during MRI or CT scans that patients could not hear. It suggested name displays, a phone with loop capability and a coloured light system.", "Notes that 14 link staff around the hospital had been trained by Hearing Loss Cornwall to carry out maintenance on hearing aids." ], "limitations": "A short account of one visit to two receptions, one ward and one diagnostic facility; loop quality was judged by listening, not measured, and the report does not name the type of personal hearing set. It is dated 9 April 2015, and the hospital's arrangements may have changed since.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2015-en-301-549-v1", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2015-en-301-549-v1/", "title": "EN 301 549 V1.1.2: Accessibility requirements suitable for public procurement of ICT products and services in Europe", "authors": "ETSI, CEN and CENELEC", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2015-04-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "European standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, CEN and CENELEC)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301500_301599/301549/01.01.02_60/en_301549v010102p.pdf", "summary": "A historical edition of the European ICT accessibility standard, including magnetic coupling for hearing technologies.", "findings": [ "The cover and document history identify publication in 2015-04.", "Clause 8.2.2.1 requires magnetic coupling for fixed-line devices with speech output held to the ear when they carry the T symbol.", "Clause 8.2.2.2 also addresses magnetic coupling in wireless communication devices with speech output normally held to the ear." ], "limitations": "Public full text downloaded; the foreword, publication history and hearing-related clauses were read. Applies to ICT equipment, including relevant venue equipment, rather than room-wide listening-system provision. Publication alone does not establish legal application or an Official Journal citation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "dft-2015-accessible-stations-code", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dft-2015-accessible-stations-code/", "title": "Design Standards for Accessible Railway Stations: a joint Code of Practice by the Department for Transport and Transport Scotland (Version 04)", "authors": "Department for Transport; Transport Scotland", "publisher": "GOV.UK", "date": "2015-03-23", "kind": "Regulatory guidance (Great Britain railway stations)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (UK Department for Transport and Transport Scotland)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/accessible-railway-stations-design-standards", "summary": "The code that station operators and Network Rail in Great Britain follow when building or renewing stations, combining mandatory requirements with guidance on induction loops at ticket offices, announcements, help points and lift intercoms.", "findings": [ "Issued under section 71B of the Railways Act 1993; licensed operators, including Network Rail, must follow it as a condition of their licence whenever they install, renew or replace infrastructure or facilities. It contains mandatory European standards (from the PRM TSI) that apply when major work is undertaken, mandatory national standards for other installations, renewals and replacements, and best-practice guidance that is not mandatory but is strongly recommended.", "Repeats the PRM TSI requirement that, where manual ticket counters, information desks and customer assistance points are provided, at least one desk is fitted with an induction loop, and that a fixed glass barrier needs an intercom. Its guidance adds that the counter loop should be mounted at 1100 mm so it is no visual barrier, that the loop symbol should be displayed, and that speak-through security panels should be avoided.", "Guidance on announcements: all PA systems should be linked to induction loops covering the main public areas (ticket office, waiting rooms, around passenger information screens), and all systems that relay recorded information, such as PA systems and help points, should be equipped with an induction loop.", "Says areas should be tested for electrical interference, \"usually heard as a buzzing noise on a hearing aid when switched to 'T'\", before a loop is installed; that effective coverage may be hard to achieve in large areas, where a series of listening areas is one solution; and that loops should be clearly signposted.", "Says all staff working where there is a loop should be trained in its use, that loops should be maintained and tested, \"ideally once a week\", with loop testers, and that broken loops should be repaired within 48 hours of notification, with alternatives such as extra staff until then.", "New help points should be fitted with induction loops and older ones fitted during maintenance programmes; lift emergency intercoms should have an induction loop.", "Does not mention Bluetooth, radio or infrared systems for announcements.", "Section L3 guidance, printed page 123, recommends both visual and aural emergency alarms and says aural emergency alarms should be distinct from other station signals, including train-door tones. This is separate from the L2 guidance linking PA systems to loops." ], "limitations": "Version 04 says it is valid from 20 March 2015; GOV.UK lists it as first published on 23 March 2015 and last updated on 31 December 2020, and the PDF read was modified in September 2020. The loop sections are guidance, not mandatory standards, except the counter requirement taken from the PRM TSI. It applies to station works in England, Scotland and Wales and gives no loop performance figures beyond pointing to BS 7594. No compliance data are given.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "transport", "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "seidler-2015-daga", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/seidler-2015-daga/", "title": "Vertikale Feldausbreitung von induktiven Höranlagen (Vertical field spread of hearing loops)", "authors": "Seidler H", "publisher": "Fortschritte der Akustik, DAGA 2015, Nürnberg (German Acoustical Society), pp. 583-585", "date": "2015-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Conference paper (short paper with building measurements)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (TU Dresden, medical faculty, ear, nose and throat department); funding not stated", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://pub.dega-akustik.de/DAGA_2015/data/articles/000428.pdf", "summary": "A German acoustician's analysis of how far a hearing loop's field reaches into rooms above and below, how much different floor constructions block it, and how to size loop segments for stacked lecture halls.", "findings": [ "Shows that a perimeter loop's field falls to the level of magnetic background noise (about -47 dB re 0.4 A/m) only at about three loop widths away, horizontally and vertically alike; an 8 x 5 m seminar room loop would be receivable up to 15 m away, and with 3 m storeys the next looped room above could only be five floors up.", "Finds that phased arrays narrow the spread but often not enough vertically: because the listening height is large compared with the narrow segments and so needs a higher loop current, spill can reach up to five segment widths; with 2 m segments, the next loop could be three floors up.", "Says passive magnetic shielding cannot be complete; conductive aluminium sheet or mesh reduces the field more than iron reinforcement, and the simulation programs of the three loop makers it names (Ampetronic, Bo Edin, Humantechnik) do not model shielding by floors.", "From first measurements in real buildings, which it says vary widely, gives provisional extra attenuation through the floor of 0 dB for timber joist floors, 6 dB for reinforced clay-block floors and 12 dB for reinforced concrete floors.", "Works an example of three stacked lecture halls with metal seat frames and concrete floors: allowing 12 dB through the floor, array segments could be 1.4 m wide (one or two seat rows), instead of 0.8 m without it; for two stacked rooms, laying the lower loop on the floor and the upper one in the ceiling increases separation." ], "limitations": "A three-page conference paper: the floor attenuation figures are described as provisional, from first measurements in an unstated number of buildings, and the field plots come partly from a maker's software (credited to Ampetronic). It addresses spill between rooms, not coverage within them. The conference ran on 16-19 March 2015.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-limits" ] }, { "id": "dfe-2015-bb93", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dfe-2015-bb93/", "title": "Acoustic design of schools: performance standards (Building bulletin 93)", "authors": "Department for Education", "publisher": "Department for Education", "date": "2015-02-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Government design guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Department for Education, England)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8170d3e5274a2e8ab54012/BB93_February_2015.pdf", "summary": "England’s school acoustic guidance covers halls and gyms as well as classrooms, with distinct criteria for new buildings and refurbishment.", "findings": [ "Sections 0.1–0.3 explain the relationship to Building Regulations Requirement E4, School Premises Regulations and Independent School Standards. School premises are also subject to the Equality Act.", "Table 6, page 34, gives mid-frequency reverberation-time ranges for assembly or multipurpose halls of 0.8–1.2 seconds for new build and 0.8–1.5 seconds for refurbishment; gymnasium/activity studios have upper limits of 1.5 and 2.0 seconds respectively. Section 1.5.1, page 32, specifies finished rooms, furnished for normal use but unoccupied.", "The performance standards address room acoustics. Section 0.1 directs readers to the separate IOA/ANC school design guide for supporting design considerations." ], "limitations": "These are acoustic design criteria, not measured listening outcomes or an assistive-listening technology requirement. Applicability depends on the type of space and work, as explained in section 0.3. Month and year are printed on the cover.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "school-auditoriums", "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "kocinski-2015", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/kocinski-2015/", "title": "Speech Intelligibility in Rooms with and without an Induction Loop for Hearing Aid Users", "authors": "Kociński J, Ozimek E", "publisher": "Archives of Acoustics 40(1):51-58", "date": "2015-01-27", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (two rooms, loop on and off)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań; supported by a grant from Poland's National Science Centre and by Norway through the Norwegian Financial Mechanism)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1515/aoa-2015-0007", "summary": "A loop-on versus loop-off test of sentence and nonsense-syllable intelligibility for 22 hearing aid users in a meeting room and a highly reverberant church, with a questionnaire on everyday listening.", "findings": [ "Tested 22 hearing aid users with mild to profound losses, each wearing one hearing aid, and 10 normal-hearing listeners for reference, in the 48 m² meeting room of the Polish Association of the Deaf (reverberation time about 0.8 s) and in a church with plaster walls and a marble floor (about 5 s).", "Loops in both rooms were driven by Univox PLS-100 amplifiers and calibrated to IEC 60118-4:2006; without the loop, listeners heard the room's own sound system through their hearing aids' microphones.", "The loop significantly improved both sentence and logatome (nonsense-syllable) intelligibility in both rooms. Without it, intelligibility was very poor in the reverberant church; with it, sentence intelligibility did not depend on reverberation and reached about 95% for listeners with mild losses, with smaller but significant gains for greater losses.", "Results did not differ significantly between measurement points within each room, so they were averaged across seats.", "On a questionnaire adapted from the APHAB, the share of everyday listening problems reported fell by more than 62 percentage points on average with the loop, and answers varied less between listeners." ], "limitations": "Two rooms, one loop amplifier model, and listeners using one hearing aid each, so the unaided ear also heard the room. The loop was compared with the hearing aid's own microphones listening to the room's sound system, not with other assistive systems. Most results are given only as figures. The paper gives the meeting room's reverberation time as about 0.8 s in its methods and about 1 s in its discussion. Field strength, background noise and frequency response at the seats are not reported. The publisher gives 27 January 2015 as the citation date; the issue went online on 2 April 2015.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "listener-preference", "loop-limits", "places-of-worship", "room-acoustics", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "risius-2015-when-the-judge-cant-hear", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/risius-2015-when-the-judge-cant-hear/", "title": "When the Judge can't hear", "authors": "Risius G", "publisher": "Counsel (counselmagazine.co.uk)", "date": "2015-01-12", "kind": "Article (first-person account by a judge)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (a Crown Court judge's own account, by Gordon Risius CB; the equipment described was supplied by Voice Products through arrangements made by the South Eastern Circuit Secretariat with the Ministry of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/when-the-judge-cant-hear", "summary": "A Crown Court judge who lost most of their hearing after a head injury criticises the typical courtroom loop and describes a replacement microphone, mixing and wireless arrangement that made trials workable.", "findings": [ "Says the typical court loop used \"a single small microphone\" designed to pick up the courtroom generally rather than the person speaking, so it could carry so many sounds that an accurate note of evidence or submissions was impossible.", "Judges that the loop \"undoubtedly helps those with mild hearing loss, but does little for those whose hearing is more seriously affected\".", "Describes what was installed instead: extra microphones for counsel and the jury, vandal-proof microphones in the dock, and a mixer that automatically selects the microphones nearest whoever is speaking to cut background noise. The sound is sent by Bluetooth to a receiver worn round the neck, which relays it to the judge's hearing aids.", "In the Problems section, reports lost clarity when recorded police interviews were played through loudspeakers and picked up by court microphones, and warns that forgetting to recharge the receiver could halt a trial. Meetings outside court stayed difficult because of background noise." ], "limitations": "One person's experience of equipment arranged for a judge, not a public assistive listening system, and not a measured comparison; written in 2015. It names the supplier but gives no technical details of the loop or the replacement system.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "compton-conley-2015", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/compton-conley-2015/", "title": "Comparison of Large Area Assistive Listening Systems", "authors": "Compton-Conley C", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America (reprint)", "date": "2015-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (reprinted by HLAA with the contact address of its Get in the Hearing Loop program; written by Cynthia Compton-Conley, PhD, of Gallaudet University; who paid for the original is not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/comparison-of-large-area-assistive-listening-systems.pdf", "summary": "A side-by-side guide to hearing loops, FM and infrared for large venues: how each works, how listeners connect, and the advantages and disadvantages of each.", "findings": [ "The FM section (printed p. 4) describes connecting the transmitter to a public-address mixer to carry voice, music and recorded material. The infrared section (printed p. 6) describes an emitter converting the base-station signal into invisible infrared light, received by a photosensitive cell on the listener's receiver.", "The opening explanation describes an assistive listening system as capturing sound near its source, carrying it to the listener and coupling it through earphones or a hearing device to reduce the effects of distance, noise and reverberation. The technology list (printed p. 2) expands FM as frequency modulation; the loop section describes telecoils in hearing devices or separate receivers, and the FM section describes a transmitter feeding receivers tuned to the same channel.", "The FM and infrared sections explain that a neckloop is a small wire loop worn around the neck, converting a receiver's electrical output into a magnetic signal for a telecoil. The infrared section distinguishes the base-station transmitter, the emitter that produces infrared light and the light-sensitive receiver, and describes line-of-sight paths and shadows caused by obstructions.", "Explains that listeners with telecoils need no borrowed receiver in a looped room, while FM and infrared require every listener, with or without hearing aids, to borrow a receiver used with earphones or a neckloop.", "Lists FM's advantages: highly portable, easy to install with the lowest installation cost (FM advantages, page 5), easy coverage of very large seating areas, several channels for adjacent rooms, translation and audio description, and use indoors or outdoors.", "Lists FM's disadvantages: receivers for everyone; signals that pass through solid surfaces, so it is unsuitable where privacy matters (encrypted digital systems exist for that); possible radio interference; and receivers the venue must clean, issue, collect and keep charged.", "Describes infrared as carrying audio on 2.3 MHz and 2.8 MHz subcarriers, normally free of radio and electrical interference, able to run several channels at once, and usable where confidentiality matters because the signal does not pass solid surfaces, provided windows are covered.", "Lists infrared's disadvantages: receivers for everyone, so listeners must draw attention to themselves to borrow one; impractical outdoors because of sunlight; line of sight to the emitters, so enough emitters must avoid shadows from columns and seats; and more cost and difficulty for very large areas such as stadiums.", "Lists loop disadvantages as well: spill into adjacent rooms from perimeter loops (much less with phased arrays), installation that can be difficult, an unencrypted signal, a single channel, and electromagnetic interference picked up by telecoils, which it notes also affects neckloop users of FM and infrared.", "Describes the US FM bands as 72-76 MHz, older and subject to interference, and 216-217 MHz, newer and intended for auditory assistance only.", "Lists as an infrared advantage that several channels, such as several languages, can run at once without interfering, and as a disadvantage that facility owners must maintain, clean, issue and collect receivers and keep their batteries charged." ], "limitations": "Expert guidance, not a study: no measurements or references are given. First written in 2006 and revised by the author in 2015; this copy is HLAA's reprint dated 28 October 2021, so it predates Auracast and says no large-area systems broadcast over Bluetooth. It is distributed by HLAA's hearing loop program. Its description of 216-217 MHz as for auditory assistance only is narrower than the FCC rules, which share the band with other uses.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-limits", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "lifetime-costs", "places-of-worship", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops", "courts-and-chambers", "broadcast-security" ] }, { "id": "kim-kim-2014", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/kim-kim-2014/", "title": "A review of assistive listening device and digital wireless technology for hearing instruments", "authors": "Kim JS, Kim CH", "publisher": "Korean Journal of Audiology 18(3):105-111", "date": "2014-12-22", "kind": "Peer-reviewed review", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Hallym University, Korea; the article gives no funding or conflict-of-interest statement)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.7874/kja.2014.18.3.105", "summary": "A narrative review of assistive listening devices (wired, FM, infrared, loops, telephone, television and alerting devices) and of the digital wireless links then arriving in hearing aids.", "findings": [ "The Assistive Listening Device section, in its FM and infrared subsections, describes neckloop and silhouette inductors as couplers that convert a receiver's signal into a magnetic signal picked up by a hearing-device telecoil. This is evidence about the coupling path shared with venue systems, not a new performance measurement.", "Describes infrared as carrying sound on invisible light to receivers used with headphones, or with a neckloop or silhouette inductor for hearing aids and implants with a telecoil.", "States that the infrared signal cannot pass through walls and is not interfered with by other electromagnetic waves, but is vulnerable to natural light, so infrared systems cannot be used outdoors or in strongly lit rooms with many competing light sources.", "Lists as infrared's advantages containment within a room, privacy, an unlimited number of receivers and \"excellent sound quality\".", "Notes that people without a telecoil can use loop receivers with headsets for a similar benefit, without the customisation a hearing aid gives." ], "limitations": "A short narrative review without new data; its statements on infrared cite no measurements. The journal records five days between receipt and acceptance. Written before Auracast.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "infrared-limits", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "iec-60118-4-2014", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-60118-4-2014/", "title": "IEC 60118-4:2014 Electroacoustics - Hearing aids - Part 4: Induction-loop systems for hearing aid purposes - System performance requirements", "authors": "IEC TC 29 (Electroacoustics)", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "2014-12-11", "kind": "Standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission; the full text is sold, and only the abstract is public)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/798", "summary": "The international performance standard for hearing loops: the magnetic field strength, frequency response and measurement methods a loop system must meet for telecoil users.", "findings": [ "Applies to audio-frequency induction-loop systems whose alternating magnetic field provides the input for hearing aids with a telecoil, and assumes those hearing aids meet the other parts of IEC 60118.", "Sets requirements for field strength meant to give an adequate signal-to-noise ratio without overloading the hearing aid, and a minimum frequency response for acceptable intelligibility.", "Specifies how to measure the magnetic field strength, with annexes on measuring equipment and on the information to be given to the system's operator and users.", "Does not cover loop driver amplifiers, microphones or other signal sources (left to IEC 62489-1), or the field produced by telephone handsets (covered by ITU-T P.370).", "This third edition replaced the 2006 edition and added annexes G, H and I on practical considerations and measurement methods. A consolidated version with Amendment 1 was published on 9 November 2017, and the IEC lists 2029 as the date to which the content stays unchanged.", "Its introduction says a loop's performance is determined by the building it is installed in, particularly by large amounts of iron, steel or aluminium in the structure, and that the layout of electrical cables and equipment may create background magnetic fields that interfere with reception.", "It also covers small loops for communicating with a hearing aid user close by, naming neck loops, ticket-counter systems, portable systems and chairs with built-in loops as examples.", "Its contents include a clause on measuring the site's magnetic background noise, with recommended maximum noise levels (clause 7), a section on care of the system (E.5), and informative annexes on the effects of metal in the building structure (with a 10 m by 14 m loop showing the effect of iron in the floor), calibration of field-strength meters, the effect of a loop's aspect ratio on the field, and overspill of the field into other areas, with examples and ways to address it.", "The catalogue lifecycle metadata dates both Amendment 1 (IEC 60118-4:2014/AMD1:2017) and consolidated edition 3.1 to 9 November 2017; the amendment date is separately listed, not inferred from the consolidated cover.", "Its introduction explains that loops help telecoil users listen through protective windows or amid background noise and can improve the signal-to-noise ratio where acoustic transmission is degraded; it names ticket offices and bank counters among uses (consolidated preview, Introduction, page 8).", "The public consolidated preview contents identify Annex G as informative and title it Calibration of field-strength meters; the figure list names Figure G.1 as a triple Helmholtz coil for calibration of meters. The preview does not include the annex procedure itself." ], "limitations": "Read from the IEC webstore abstract and from the public preview of the consolidated edition 3.1 (2017) published by the German standards publisher VDE Verlag (https://www.vde-verlag.de/iec-normen/preview-pdf/info_iec60118-4%7Bed3.1%7Db.pdf), which shows the cover, the contents, the introduction and the scope; the rest of the 109-page text is paywalled. Neither states the numeric targets (reference field strength, tolerances, frequency limits, maximum background noise), so any figure quoted for them comes from secondary summaries, such as manufacturers' commissioning guides, and has not been checked here against the standard.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "which-technology", "service-counters", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "telecoil-fitting", "loop-and-auracast", "signage-and-awareness", "places-of-worship", "neckloops", "healthcare-settings", "portable-and-counter-loops", "measuring-tools", "procurement" ] }, { "id": "eu-2014-prm-tsi", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/eu-2014-prm-tsi/", "title": "Commission Regulation (EU) No 1300/2014 on the technical specifications for interoperability relating to accessibility of the Union's rail system for persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility (PRM TSI), consolidated text of 28 September 2023", "authors": "European Commission", "publisher": "EUR-Lex (Publications Office of the European Union)", "date": "2014-11-18", "kind": "Regulation (EU)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (European Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02014R1300-20230928", "summary": "The EU's binding accessibility rules for rail stations and trains, which require an induction loop at one or more ticket, information or assistance desks and set intelligibility targets for spoken announcements, but do not require loops on trains.", "findings": [ "Point 4.2.1.8: where manual ticket sales counters, information desks and customer assistance points are provided, \"a minimum of one desk shall be fitted with an induction loop system for hearing assistance\". If a glass barrier separates passenger and seller, it must be removable or an intercom must be fitted.", "Point 4.2.1.10 (stations) and point 4.2.2.7.2 (rolling stock): where inductive loops are fitted, they must be indicated by a sign or pictogram as described in Appendix N, which takes the loop symbol from ETSI EN 301 462. The rolling stock text requires the sign only where loops are fitted and does not require loops on board.", "Spoken information in stations must reach a minimum STI-PA of 0.45 (point 4.2.1.11). On trains, the public address system must announce the destination and next stop, give the next stop at least two minutes before arrival where possible, and reach STI-PA 0.45 at all seat locations and wheelchair spaces (point 4.2.2.7.4).", "Applies to new infrastructure and rolling stock placed in service after its date of application, and to existing infrastructure and rolling stock when renewed or upgraded.", "Does not mention Bluetooth, Auracast or any other assistive listening technology besides the induction loop." ], "limitations": "Read from the consolidated HTML text on EUR-Lex (amendments up to 28 September 2023, marked M4 where the 2023 amendment changed the wording); later amendments, if any, were not checked. It sets the number of looped desks and the sign, not loop performance, and says nothing on maintenance or testing. The 2014 date is that of the original regulation; the wording summarised is the consolidated text.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "ed-doj-2014-school-communication-faq", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ed-doj-2014-school-communication-faq/", "title": "Frequently Asked Questions on Effective Communication for Students with Hearing, Vision, or Speech Disabilities in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools", "authors": "US Department of Justice; US Department of Education", "publisher": "US Departments of Justice and Education", "date": "2014-11-12", "kind": "Government guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (joint guidance from the US Departments of Justice and Education)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://archive.ada.gov/doe_doj_eff_comm/doe_doj_eff_comm_faqs.htm", "summary": "Federal guidance separates public schools’ effective-communication duties from individual special-education entitlements.", "findings": [ "The introduction says public schools must apply both the IDEA and Title II analyses; meeting one does not necessarily meet the other. Question 11 says IDEA eligibility or an IEP is not required for Title II communication assistance.", "Questions 2–4 name assistive listening systems among possible auxiliary aids and require primary consideration of the requested aid. The duty extends to school-related communications; footnote 29 also describes IDEA support for extracurricular and nonacademic participation.", "Question 4 requires a case-by-case assessment of communication needs. Question 7 extends effective-communication duties to people with disabilities who are not students, including parents, relatives and members of the public at ceremonies, performances and other school activities.", "Questions 12–13 recommend a known contact and informed staff, say a specific parental request is not necessary when the school knows communication assistance is needed, and require continuing assessment of effectiveness.", "Question 19 limits IDEA funding to auxiliary aids and services also required under IDEA, such as technology included in the IEP." ], "limitations": "Guidance rather than a building specification; no preferred venue technology or receiver count. Used only for access to school activities and the boundary with venue provision. The accompanying letter supplies the date. Litigation and procedural advice are outside this record’s use.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "brennan-2014-bandwidth-preference", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/brennan-2014-bandwidth-preference/", "title": "Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing-aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss", "authors": "Brennan MA, McCreery R, Kopun J, Hoover B, Alexander J, Lewis D, Stelmachowicz PG", "publisher": "Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 25(10):983-998", "date": "2014-11-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (blinded paired comparisons)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Boys Town National Research Hospital and Purdue University; NIH grants R01 DC04300, P30 DC-4662, T32 DC00013, F32 DC012709 and R03 DC012635)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4269381/", "summary": "Compared preferences for speech and music with restricted bandwidth, extended bandwidth and frequency lowering in a hearing-aid simulator.", "findings": [ "Sixteen children aged 8-16 and 16 adults aged 19-65 with mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss completed the study; one additional child was excluded for a data-collection error.", "Participants and examiner were blinded to processing: low-pass filtering at 5 kHz, extended bandwidth to about 11 kHz, or nonlinear frequency compression.", "The Results section reports a significant speech preference for extended over restricted bandwidth (p = .043) and for nonlinear frequency compression over restricted bandwidth (p < .001), but no significant preference between extended bandwidth and frequency compression (p = .108). Music showed no overall preference; greater high-frequency hearing loss was associated with less preference for extended over restricted bandwidth for music, with no significant hearing-loss association for speech.", "Methods, Participants: eligibility required that both extended bandwidth and frequency compression improve audibility over restricted bandwidth in at least one ear." ], "limitations": "The abstract says extended bandwidth was preferred to both alternatives, but the Results and Discussion report no significant preference over frequency compression; findings here follow the detailed results. Preference judgments rather than measured speech recognition; selected listeners and simulated amplification through headphones. Shared evidence about the final hearing-device path, not venue systems. Full author manuscript read; date uses the November-December 2014 issue.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "kochkin-2014", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/kochkin-2014/", "title": "Consumer Perceptions of the Impact of Inductively Looped Venues on the Utility of Their Hearing Devices", "authors": "Kochkin S, Sterkens J, Compton-Conley C, Beck DL, Taylor B, Kricos P, Caccavo M, Holmes A, Powers TA", "publisher": "Hearing Review (October 2014 issue)", "date": "2014-09-24", "kind": "Paper (online consumer survey in a trade journal)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Manufacturer (paid for by grants from Etymotic Research, Contacta, Listen Technologies, IntriCon and Univox by Edin, which the acknowledgments describe as including two hearing loop makers, an assistive listening company and two hearing-device technology makers; co-author Juliëtte Sterkens runs the Loop Wisconsin advocacy blog, one of the recruitment channels. The article prints no affiliations; from other sources, co-author Douglas L. Beck worked for the hearing-aid maker Oticon, joining as director of professional relations in 2005 (AudiologyOnline, 20 August 2005) and named director of academic sciences in 2016 (Hearing Review, 6 April 2016), and co-author Thomas A. Powers was vice-president of audiology at the hearing-aid maker Siemens Hearing Instruments (Hearing Review, 19 September 2013) and later a vice-president of its successor, Sivantos (Better Hearing Institute biography))", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://hearingreview.com/hearing-products/implants-bone-conduction/cochlear-implants/consumer-perceptions-impact-inductively-looped-venues-utility-hearing-devices", "summary": "Two online surveys of hearing aid and cochlear implant users who had listened in a looped venue, asking how the loop changed their hearing and which venue system they prefer.", "findings": [ "The Method section describes Survey 2 as an emailed follow-up to Survey 1 respondents who supplied an address. The sample description gives 89% in the United States, 10% in Europe and 1% in Australia and Canada. Figure 3 and its accompanying text include homes among the settings rated, alongside conferences/classrooms, worship venues and theatres/auditoriums.", "The Results text beside Table 1 reports no change or worse listening for 7-9% on sound quality, speech understanding, concentration and background noise, and for 24% on separating speech from music (Survey 2, n=243). These are the less favourable responses to the same scales that produced the positive ratings.", "Survey 1 had 866 usable responses from people asked to think of one looped venue. On a 1-10 scale from \"heard nothing\" to \"heard every word\", the mean rating of their hearing device was 4.9 without a loop and 8.7 in the loop; 13.5% rated 8 or higher without the loop against 86% with it.", "Nearly 9 in 10 agreed or strongly agreed that the loop increased their satisfaction with their hearing aid or cochlear implant. Of 418 written comments, 84% were positive; 44 people (5%) said the loop gave them no benefit.", "In follow-up Survey 2 (243 usable responses), about 7 in 10 rated the loop +4 or +5 on a -5 to +5 scale for sound quality, speech understanding, less need to concentrate and ignoring background noise; 38% gave that rating for separating voices from music.", "Offered three options (loop with their hearing device, FM or infrared with a neckloop, FM or infrared with a headset), 81% chose the loop as their preferred large-venue system. Among the 125 respondents who had used all three, 88% chose the loop, 12.8% FM or infrared with a neckloop and 4.8% FM or infrared with a headset.", "82% said they were very or extremely likely to seek out ticketed venues with a hearing loop.", "Only 35% said their hearing care professional had demonstrated the telecoil when fitting their device.", "Negative comments named uneven loop signals, electrical buzzing, presenters not using microphones, loops left switched off, and telecoil problems (orientation, missing ambient sound, finding the setting).", "The preference question was asked in Survey 2 (Figure 8, most preferred hearing technology in large venues, n=243).", "Recruited through HLAA's membership, the @LoopWisconsin blog, the UK Hearing Link website, the Hearing Health Matters blog, and Facebook and Twitter advertisements; the telecoil-demonstration question (Figure 11) was also in Survey 2.", "The authors acknowledge that people against loops or in favour of other wireless technologies may not have responded, and that results could differ with milder hearing losses or other wireless technologies.", "Implant users made up 34% of respondents in Survey 1 and 21% in Survey 2 (bimodal users included), against under 1% of US hearing-device users in MarkeTrak 2009; one implant user wrote of hearing \"a chainsaw like background noise\" when using the implant's telecoil.", "Does not report results separately for implant users.", "Figure 9 identifies the sample behind the 82% likelihood of seeking ticketed loop venues as the 243 respondents to Survey 2." ], "limitations": "A convenience sample, which the authors say is not random or representative: respondents were mostly HLAA members, likely aware of HLAA's loop campaign, answering surveys titled \"Get in the Hearing Loop\", and everyone had already used a loop. They report far more profound hearing loss than typical hearing aid users, and 89% were in the US. The preference question offered no Bluetooth or Wi-Fi option and counted only systems a respondent had used. The authors could not check loop quality or telecoil settings. Survey dates are not given. The article is inconsistent about the preference question: its method describes ranking three technologies \"used while watching TV\", while Figure 8 is titled as the most preferred technology in large venues, and the figures for the 125 respondents who had used all three (88%, 12.8% and 4.8%) add up to more than 100%.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "telecoil-fitting", "infrared-limits", "signage-and-awareness", "places-of-worship", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "scotus-2014-hearing-loop", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/scotus-2014-hearing-loop/", "title": "Press release of 5 September 2014: new assistive listening system in the Courtroom", "authors": "Supreme Court of the United States, Public Information Office", "publisher": "Supreme Court of the United States", "date": "2014-09-05", "kind": "Press release", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Government (Supreme Court of the United States)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-05-14", "summary": "The US Supreme Court's announcement that it had installed a hearing loop in its Courtroom while keeping its FM and infrared receivers.", "findings": [ "Announces a hearing loop installed in the Courtroom \"to improve visitor services\", available from the start of the October 2014 Term.", "Says the loop's signal is picked up by most hearing aids and cochlear implants without extra equipment, and that listening devices will be available for visitors without hearing aids or whose aids do not work with the loop.", "Says the Court will continue to offer the FM and infrared listening devices made available to Courtroom visitors in the past." ], "limitations": "A short announcement: it gives no reason for choosing a loop, no design or test details, and nothing on confidentiality or later use.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "seidler-2014", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/seidler-2014/", "title": "Induktive Höranlagen – internationale Trends und aktuelle Normung (Induction loop systems: international trends and current standards)", "authors": "Seidler H", "publisher": "Fortschritte der Akustik – DAGA 2014 (annual conference of the German Acoustical Society, Oldenburg), pages 294-295", "date": "2014-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Conference paper (in German)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Hannes Seidler, ENT clinic of the medical faculty, TU Dresden; funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pub.dega-akustik.de/DAGA_2014/data/articles/000138.pdf", "summary": "A two-page German conference paper on what the 2014 revision of IEC 60118-4 changed, on the German building rules that call for loops, and on how many hearing aids on the German market have a telecoil.", "findings": [ "Summarises the changes in the new edition of IEC 60118-4: more specific measurement methods and test signals, new requirements for room systems and for local systems, account of metal in the building, and planning to limit overspill.", "Says magnetic background noise is now to be checked with and without the amplifiers switched on and also with dimmable lighting at half power, and that the speech test signal ISTS and a combined sine and pink-noise signal join the earlier sine, pink noise and simulated speech.", "Says both RMS and peak meters are allowed for measuring the magnetic field, but peak meters are no longer recommended.", "For small systems such as alarm call points and counters, reports a required field level within ±6 dB over the defined zone, never more than 8 dB above, and for counters a level of at most -20 dB where other customers wait.", "Reports the author's updated count of telecoils in the 860 hearing aids available on the German market (status 2013): almost two-thirds have a telecoil or can be fitted with one, so the long-feared decline in telecoils had not, the author writes, taken place. Whether the telecoil is used in a program of the hearing aid is left to the hearing aid acoustician.", "Says Bluetooth interfaces were then no alternative for public systems: lip-sync cannot be ensured because delays in the standard protocol depend on the transmission path, range is only up to 10 m, at most 10 devices can be coupled to one transmitter, and Bluetooth chips were too power-hungry and too expensive. It reports that at the 2013 Induction Loop Conference a speaker from Widex described the hearing aid industry's aim of replacing loops with a low-cost radio-based Telecoil Replacement System, and adds that no common technical solution was then in sight.", "Reports that under the accessible-building standard DIN 18040, adopted as a technical building rule in all but four German states (as of 7 March 2014), new service counters with glazing and an intercom must use a loop (at least one where there are several), and assembly, training and seminar rooms with sound systems need an assistive listening system, preferably a loop.", "The Current standards section says the new requirements are expected to apply to installations in Germany during 2014; reference 1 dates the cited IEC document to 2013. The paper therefore describes anticipated German application of revised requirements, rather than establishing the text of the final December 2014 IEC edition." ], "limitations": "The small-system paragraph on page 295 does not state the reference level for its dB figures, including the waiting-area maximum of -20 dB. The paper precedes the December 2014 IEC publication and cites a 2013 version in reference [1]. A short conference summary written before the 2014 edition was adopted in Germany. It gives the tolerances for small systems but not the room-system figures, and it has not been checked here against the paywalled standard. The building rules are German. The 2013 hearing aid count is the author's own, with no method given; it counts models available, not devices sold or in use, and its breakdown is shown only in a chart. The conference was held on 10 to 13 March 2014.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "service-counters", "listener-reach", "loop-verification", "healthcare-settings", "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2014-en-301-549-v1", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2014-en-301-549-v1/", "title": "EN 301 549 V1.1.1: Accessibility requirements suitable for public procurement of ICT products and services in Europe", "authors": "ETSI, CEN and CENELEC", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2014-02-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "European standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, CEN and CENELEC)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301500_301599/301549/01.01.01_60/en_301549v010101p.pdf", "summary": "A historical edition of the European ICT accessibility standard, including magnetic coupling for hearing technologies.", "findings": [ "The cover and document history identify publication in 2014-02.", "The Foreword, printed page 15, separately records EN adoption on 27 January 2014 and national transposition deadlines: announcement by 30 April 2014, and publication of a national standard or endorsement, and withdrawal of conflicting national standards, by 31 October 2014. These are deadlines, not confirmation that every country completed those steps.", "Clause 8.2.2.1 requires magnetic coupling for fixed-line devices with speech output held to the ear when they carry the T symbol.", "Clause 8.2.2.2 also addresses magnetic coupling in wireless communication devices with speech output normally held to the ear." ], "limitations": "Public full text downloaded; the foreword, publication history and hearing-related clauses were read. Applies to ICT equipment, including relevant venue equipment, rather than room-wide listening-system provision. Publication alone does not establish legal application or an Official Journal citation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "ehrc-2014-further-higher-education", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ehrc-2014-further-higher-education/", "title": "Equality Act 2010 Technical Guidance on Further and Higher Education", "authors": "Equality and Human Rights Commission", "publisher": "Equality and Human Rights Commission", "date": "2014-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Equality law technical guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Equality and Human Rights Commission, Great Britain’s equality regulator)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/equalityact2010-technicalguidance-feandhe-2015.pdf", "summary": "Guidance on reasonable adjustments in further and higher education, including anticipatory provision, maintenance and backup arrangements for listening systems.", "findings": [ "Paragraph 1.8 says the guidance applies to England, Scotland and Wales. Paragraph 1.5 says it is not a statutory Code, although it may be evidence in legal proceedings.", "Paragraphs 7.19–7.20 describe an anticipatory duty toward disabled students generally. One example is a university proactively installing induction loops in lecture rooms rather than waiting for individual requests.", "Paragraphs 7.40–7.41 require reasonable steps to provide auxiliary aids or services that remove substantial disadvantage, and list induction loops and infrared broadcast systems as examples.", "Paragraph 7.42 calls for carefully chosen and maintained aids and contingency arrangements for unexpected failure. Its example is regular testing of permanent lecture-hall loops with a portable loop as backup.", "Paragraph 7.44 leaves the particular aid open, with the provider responsible for determining reasonable steps." ], "limitations": "Date uses the document’s 2014 copyright year; the URL and PDF creation metadata refer to 2015. The loop examples illustrate the reasonable-adjustment duty, rather than prescribing loops in every university room. No system performance measurements. Read the scope and relevant Chapter 7 provisions.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lecture-halls" ] }, { "id": "alva-2013-scottish-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/alva-2013-scottish-loops/", "title": "Scotland’s attractions ‘failing the deaf’", "authors": "Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (industry news supplied by Attractions Management)", "publisher": "Association of Leading Visitor Attractions", "date": "2013-12-29", "kind": "Reported field checks", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Trade body (ALVA publishes Attractions Management news reporting Action on Hearing Loss Scotland’s charity-led checks; project funding is not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.alva.org.uk/details.cfm?p=413&codeid=307847", "summary": "Contemporaneous coverage reports working loops at the main ticket or information point of three of 21 Scottish attractions.", "findings": [ "Reports that Action on Hearing Loss Scotland checked 21 venues and found working loops at the main ticket or information point in three.", "Names Stirling Castle, McManus Museum in Dundee and St Mungo’s Museum in Glasgow as the three with working loops.", "Separately reports high overall deaf-friendly ratings for Stirling Castle, the National Museum of Scotland and Holyrood Palace.", "Quotes the charity’s call for information-point loops to be installed, maintained and switched on, and for staff awareness training." ], "limitations": "Secondary coverage, not the original charity report. The original check sheets, selection method, number of visitors, measurements and project funding were not available. The article was published in December 2013 but does not date the checks; these findings cannot describe current equipment. The article spells Stirling correctly in its working-loop list but differently in its overall-rating list.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "doj-2013-newseum-settlement", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2013-newseum-settlement/", "title": "Settlement Agreement between the United States of America and the Newseum, Inc., including Appendix 1 (DJ 202-16-190)", "authors": "US Department of Justice; Newseum, Inc.", "publisher": "US Department of Justice", "date": "2013-12-06", "kind": "Regulatory enforcement (settlement agreement)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice enforcement agreement with the museum)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://archive.ada.gov/newseum/newseum-sa.htm", "summary": "A Washington, DC museum settlement required listening systems, specified receiver numbers and hearing-aid compatibility, signs, maintenance, management training and reporting.", "findings": [ "The agreement took effect on the last signature, 6 December 2013. It resolved a Title III review of the Newseum in Washington, DC, without litigation or admission of liability. DOJ found missing assistive listening systems among wider access failures.", "Appendix 1, items 66-68, requires systems and at least two receivers, both hearing-aid compatible, in each of the three 47-seat orientation theatres and the 47-seat Sports Theater. Each also needed availability signs.", "Appendix 1, item 76, requires at least three receivers, two hearing-aid compatible, in the 55-seat Internet, TV, Radio Theater; item 77 requires at least five, two hearing-aid compatible, in the 120-seat Big Screen Theater. Both required systems and signs.", "Paragraphs 22-23 require accessible equipment to remain operational and the appendix remedies to be completed within twelve months. The agreement also requires an officer responsible for access and complaints, a complaint-resolution policy, training for supervisors and managers, and annual progress reports.", "Paragraph 27 places supervisor and manager training under the access officer’s direction. Paragraph 28 requires reports to document completed revisions, employee-training dates and content, and adopted access policies. The last report is due three months before expiry; reporting can end earlier if the museum demonstrates full completion and DOJ accepts it.", "The agreement requires a $15,000 payment to the US Treasury for the overall matter. It does not apportion that sum to assistive listening.", "The investigation used the 1991 Standards, while the agreement says the 2010 Standards govern remedial actions. The term was three years unless extended." ], "limitations": "A negotiated, venue-specific agreement covering many barriers. Its receiver examples are historical terms for specified rooms, not a universal percentage. The agreement and full Appendix 1 were read; later implementation reports were not obtained. The monetary payment cannot be attributed solely to listening-system failures.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "complaints-and-cases" ] }, { "id": "dsb-2013-warum-induktive-hoeranlagen", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dsb-2013-warum-induktive-hoeranlagen/", "title": "Warum IndukTive Höranlagen? Muss man sie in öffentlichen Gebäuden wirklich einbauen? (Why induction loops? Must they really be installed in public buildings?)", "authors": "Ruhe C (DSB-Referat Barrierefreies Planen und Bauen)", "publisher": "Deutscher Schwerhörigenbund e.V. (refeRATgeber 04)", "date": "2013-11-02", "kind": "Advocacy guidance (planning brochure)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Deutscher Schwerhörigenbund, the German federation of hard-of-hearing and deafened people, through its accessible planning and building section led by the engineer Carsten Ruhe; the brochure states that its printing was paid for with financial support from four companies, among them the loop makers Ampetronic and Univox, with beyerdynamic and Humantechnik)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.schwerhoerigen-netz.de/fileadmin/user_upload/dsb/Dokumente/Information/Service/Ratgeber/refeRATgeber_04_-_Warum_indukTive_Hoeranlagen.pdf", "summary": "A German hard-of-hearing association's brochure for building owners and planners on whether and how to provide hearing systems, with its comparison table of loops, FM and infrared, including relative costs, which entered German and Swiss standards.", "findings": [ "Says it was asked whether the investment and running costs of loops, FM and infrared are known, and answers that \"zu den Kosten lediglich qualitative Aussagen möglich sind\" (only qualitative statements are possible on costs), adding that much can be stated more precisely project by project.", "Its comparison table rates equipment and installation cost as generally lowest for loops (cost factor 1), FM as dearer (about factor 2) and infrared as very dear (about factor 2.5). It states that its section developed the table for the association, that it entered DIN 18041 in 2004 (Table C1) and Switzerland's SIA 500 (Annex D), and that it has since been revised.", "On running effort, the table lists none for telecoil users of a loop, and an issue and return point plus regular receiver maintenance for listeners without a telecoil; for FM and infrared it lists, for every event, an issue and return point, regular maintenance of receivers, and explaining the receiver and its neckloop or audio cable to users.", "Quotes a note in DIN 18040-1:2010-10 that a loop is in general the most favourable solution for users and in construction and maintenance costs, and notes that listeners without hearing aids must borrow a receiver, against a deposit, with all three systems.", "On installation effort, it says laying loop cable in a retrofit may be laborious, FM may need a frequency licence, and infrared retrofits may be laborious, for example under heritage protection.", "For retrofits it proposes: measure interfering magnetic fields in the room; if low enough, set up a temporary loop and measure field strength and its distribution, trying layouts where reinforcement or other metal is present; tender the loop with some loan receivers as part of the sound system; measure again after the work; and add clear signs." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance without cost data: the cost factors are relative and, by the association's own account, qualitative. The association advocates loops for churches, theatres, lecture halls and cinemas, and the brochure's printing was supported by companies that sell loop equipment. German standards and law as of 2013; it predates Auracast. In German; the date is the copyright date printed in the brochure (2 November 2013).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs", "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "schafer-2013", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/schafer-2013/", "title": "Electromagnetic versus Electrical Coupling of Personal Frequency Modulation (FM) Receivers to Cochlear Implant Sound Processors", "authors": "Schafer EC, Romine D, Musgrave E, Momin S, Huynh C", "publisher": "Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 24(10):927-940", "date": "2013-11-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (repeated-measures, small sample)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of North Texas; PubMed tags the study as having non-US-government research support without naming it; the FM receivers tested were Oticon's)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/10.3766/jaaa.24.10.5", "summary": "A small study comparing a neckloop into a cochlear implant processor's telecoil with a directly connected receiver, for speech understanding in noise.", "findings": [ "Nine adolescents and adults used Advanced Bionics Harmony, Cochlear Nucleus 5 or MED-EL OPUS 2 processors (three each) with an Oticon neckloop FM receiver, which feeds the processor's telecoil, and with an Oticon receiver connected directly to the processor.", "Both receivers gave significantly better speech recognition in noise than the implant alone. At the same gain setting, the neckloop gave significantly better speech recognition in noise, and better ratings in some situations, than the direct connection.", "When each receiver's best gain setting was compared, the difference was no longer significant. Output measured through a Nucleus 5 differed between the two receivers at the same setting and matched when the direct receiver's gain was raised.", "The authors attribute the result to the processor's different handling of direct input and telecoil input, and call for a more objective way to fit such systems to implant processors." ], "limitations": "Read from the publisher's abstract only; the full text, including any funding statement, could not be read. Personal FM receivers, not venue systems; nine participants (seven in the second experiment); processors of 2013.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "univox-ctc-installation-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/univox-ctc-installation-guide/", "title": "CTC-systems: Loop driver for cross-the-counter systems - Installation Guide", "authors": "Bo Edin AB", "publisher": "Bo Edin AB (Univox; copy hosted by UK distributor UnivoxAudio)", "date": "2013-09-06", "kind": "Manufacturer installation guide", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Bo Edin AB, maker of the Univox counter-loop systems described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.univoxaudio.co.uk/catalogue/products/pdfs/ctc-systems-ig-gb.pdf", "summary": "Installation instructions for six counter-loop kits consisting of a driver, loop pad and microphone, with diagrams of pad placement under the counter.", "findings": [ "Describes six CTC kits with a loop driver, loop pad and either a glass/wall microphone or a desktop gooseneck microphone (page 1).", "Describes the systems as always active: the listener selects the hearing aid T setting and staff speak normally into the microphone (pages 2-7).", "For the illustrated counters, places the pad in the angle between the underside of the counter top and the front panel. Says this shapes the field so the listener can lean forward to write; warns against damaging the loop wires inside the pad (pages 2-7).", "Places the microphone where staff can sit or stand and converse normally. Microphone and loop-pad positions are separate parts of the installation (pages 2-7).", "Recommends checking sound quality and basic loop level with a loop receiver, and lists a field-strength meter for professional measurement against IEC 60118-4 (page 8)." ], "limitations": "Product instructions without independent measurements or a listener study. Pad placement is specific to the illustrated geometry. The date is supported by the document code CTC-systems_DuGb_130906 and matching PDF creation metadata. Its indicator-light advice alone cannot establish field coverage or speech quality.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "aohl-2013-visitor-attractions", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/aohl-2013-visitor-attractions/", "title": "Taking action to make the UK’s visitor attractions accessible to all people with hearing loss", "authors": "Action on Hearing Loss (organisational account; no individual byline shown)", "publisher": "Museums + Heritage Advisor", "date": "2013-08-28", "kind": "Charity field-check account and guidance", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Independent (Action on Hearing Loss reports its own checks; the article also promotes the charity’s equipment sales and access services; check funding is not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://museumsandheritage.com/advisor/posts/taking-action-to-make-the-uks-visitor-attractions-accessible-to-all-people/", "summary": "The charity reports poor loop availability at London attractions and gives operational guidance and an attraction’s positive tour-system feedback.", "findings": [ "Reports that work with 20 London attractions before the 2012 Olympics found three with loops in good working order; of 11 advertising loops, seven actually had one.", "Recommends regular loop maintenance, clear signs, staff and volunteer awareness training, website access information and visitor feedback mechanisms.", "Recommends tour systems carrying the guide’s voice to hearing devices.", "Quotes Denby Pottery staff reporting clearer listening over factory noise and positive visitor feedback after buying a tour system from the charity; gives no technology, sample size or measurements." ], "limitations": "The check protocol, visitor numbers and project funding are not given. This is also an article promoting the charity’s equipment and services; the Denby account is an unsized testimonial, not an independent trial. An unrelated percentage about business choice lacks sample information and is not used here. The London checks are distinct from the Scottish checks reported in December 2013.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "listen-2013-loop-costing", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2013-loop-costing/", "title": "Installing Hearing Loop Systems and Costing", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "SynAudCon (prosoundtraining.com)", "date": "2013-08-12", "kind": "Manufacturer guidance (cost examples)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, which sells the loop drivers, phased array kits and design service priced in the examples; published on the audio training site of SynAudCon)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.prosoundtraining.com/2013/08/12/installing-hearing-loop-systems-costing/", "summary": "A loop seller's worked cost examples showing how metal loss, spill control and floor work raise the installed price of a hearing loop in rooms of the same size.", "findings": [ "Says site factors can change a loop's installed cost by a factor of two to five, and that magnetic background noise should be measured first, ideally with all electrical systems on, then metal loss with a test loop.", "Treats a room up to about 13.7 x 13.7 m (45 x 45 ft) with no metal as suitable for a simple perimeter loop, and larger rooms or any metal as needing a more complex design such as a phased array with two drivers and a phase shifter, for which the carpet must come up over the whole floor.", "Says simple perimeter loops radiate fields two to three times their width, so adjacent rooms that may be looped later need spill-control arrays, which cost more in equipment and labour.", "Prices two 150-seat, 40 x 40 ft (12.19 x 12.19 m) churches at 2013 list prices: a simple perimeter loop at $3,002 (no metal, no neighbouring loops, copper tape under carpet) and a low-spill phased array at $11,731.20 (metal loss, future neighbouring loops and a polished concrete floor needing $3,240 of saw-cutting), nearly four times as much (3.9 times).", "Prices the main floor of a 1,000-seat performing arts centre with no metal loss at $19,899 with two phased arrays, and the same venue with metal loss and the balcony and boxes added at $43,371, of which $18,000 is concrete cutting; it puts concrete sawing at $2 to $10 per foot or more and says that avoiding it, which brings no technical benefit to the loop, saves significantly.", "Says that on a new build with no metal loss, installers can lay the loop before the floor covering in two to six hours, while retrofits under existing floors bring hidden costs and risks.", "Installation Factors gives $100-$140 MSRP for 350 ft of 16 or 14 AWG loop wire and $650-$2,100 MSRP for a single driver, depending on current. Concrete sawing is estimated at $2-$10 per foot or more; the text appends an ambiguous parenthetical metre symbol, while examples 2 and 4 explicitly use lengths in feet at $3 per foot. All four examples assume $100 per technician-hour.", "Example 1 itemises $250 initial testing, $399 LA-30 basic design, $144 for 164 ft of FB1.8 copper tape, $12 for 30 ft of 14 AWG feeder cable, $98 for 164 ft of PWT tape, $1,499 for one ILD500 driver and $600 for six hours of installation and commissioning labour. The stated total is $3,002.", "Example 2 itemises $250 testing, $795 LA-31 advanced design, $421.20 for 1,080 ft of 14 AWG loop cable, $24 for 60 ft of feeder cable, $4,901 for an A1000G-RM phased array kit, $3,240 for concrete cutting and $2,100 for 21 hours of installation, filling, finishing and commissioning labour. The stated total is $11,731.20.", "Example 3 covers only the main floor of the 1,000-seat venue, excluding its two boxes and balcony. It itemises $500 testing for two loops, $795 advanced design, $4,464 for 31 rolls of FB1.8 copper tape, $3,038 for 31 rolls of PWT tape, $9,802 for two A1000G-RM kits ($4,901 each) and $1,300 for 13 hours of labour. The stated total is $19,899.", "Example 4 covers the main floor, two boxes and balcony with metal loss and wire buried in concrete. It itemises $1,000 for four tests, $1,590 for two advanced design fees, $1,680 for 6,000 ft of 16 AWG wire, $9,802 for two main-floor A1000G-RM kits, $3,701 for a balcony A500-RM kit, $2,988 for two ILD500 box drivers, $18,000 for 6,000 ft of concrete cutting and $4,600 for 46 hours of installation, filling, finishing and calibration labour. It also prints $1,499 per ILD500 driver. The printed components sum to $43,361, $10 below the stated $43,371 total; the driver pair also differs by $10 from twice the printed unit price. These are source inconsistencies, not corrected prices." ], "limitations": "Worked examples, not costs from completed projects: list prices of the seller's own products in 2013, labour at an assumed $100 an hour, and US concrete prices. The page names no individual author; the text speaks for Listen Technologies.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "loop-limits", "loop-and-auracast", "lifetime-costs", "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "wireless-rerc-2013", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/wireless-rerc-2013/", "title": "User Needs: Assistive Listening Systems in Public Venues for Hearing Aid Users (Research Brief 2013, No. 3)", "authors": "Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center for Wireless Technologies (Wireless RERC)", "publisher": "Wireless RERC (archive hosted by the Georgia Institute of Technology)", "date": "2013-08-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Paper (research brief reporting a user survey)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Government (US Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, grant H133E110002; the questionnaire was designed as a market-needs study for an app-based assistive listening system being developed with Wireless RERC support)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://wirelessrercarchive.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Research%20Brief_Survey_Assistive%20Listening%20Services_2013-08-01.pdf", "summary": "A short survey of 180 people with hearing loss on how often venues provide assistive listening, how often they use it and how satisfied they are, framed around interest in a phone-app alternative.", "findings": [ "Table 8 (p. 4) separates system-user satisfaction into very satisfied 7%, somewhat satisfied 56%, somewhat unsatisfied 24% and very unsatisfied 13%; the subgroup count is not printed.", "Tables 9-10 (p. 4) place hypothetical app use after a question about using the smartphone's built-in microphone as a local amplifier. Table 10 gives yes 86% and no 14%; the text identifies smartphone users but supplies no subgroup count. This context does not establish demand for venue Wi-Fi streaming or Auracast.", "180 people with hearing loss answered between 22 January and 1 April 2013, recruited by convenience sampling through the RERC's consumer network, website and social media, and organisations including the National Association of the Deaf and the Hearing Loss Association of America.", "66% said assistive listening is rarely provided at the public events they attend, 27% sometimes and 7% often.", "Table 7 (p. 4) asks whether respondents use an assistive listening system when it is available: 36% said often, 34% sometimes and 30% never. It gives no item-level respondent count; the 180 respondents reported in the Methodology (pp. 1-2) are the overall survey sample.", "Of those who use it, 63% were very or somewhat satisfied (56% only somewhat) and 37% somewhat or very unsatisfied.", "86% of smartphone users said they would use an assistive listening app if one existed; 11% had ever used their phone as an amplifier at a meeting or event." ], "limitations": "Small convenience sample; the authors say the questionnaire was short and that a larger, more detailed study is needed. It does not ask which technology venues used, so it cannot compare loops, FM, infrared or others. It was designed to test demand for an app-based system the RERC was supporting, which may have shaped the questions. Data from 2013, before Auracast.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference" ] }, { "id": "valente-2013", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/valente-2013/", "title": "The Telecoil: The Lonely Transducer that Can Be a Big Producer", "authors": "Valente M", "publisher": "AudiologyOnline (article 11911)", "date": "2013-06-24", "kind": "Article (transcript of a continuing-education webinar)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (Michael Valente, professor and director of adult audiology at Washington University School of Medicine; published by AudiologyOnline, a commercial continuing-education site; the author declares no commercial interest in the manufacturers whose fitting software is shown)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/telecoil-lonely-transducer-that-big-11911", "summary": "An audiologist's course on how hearing aid telecoils are set up, with measured examples of default telecoil settings that are much quieter than the microphone setting.", "findings": [ "Reports wide variation between manufacturers in the default telecoil response: for some it matches the microphone response, for others it is much lower.", "In one hearing aid the author measured, the telecoil was on average 16.4 dB softer than the microphone at 1,000, 1,600 and 2,500 Hz until it was reprogrammed, after which it was 5.2 dB louder, a 21 dB change made in the fitting software.", "Notes that a telecoil in a radial rather than axial field gives about 6 dB less output (citing Preves 1996), that a vertical telecoil suits room loops and a horizontal one suits telephones, and that many makers mount it diagonally as a compromise.", "Gives the view that most audiologists leave the telecoil at the manufacturer's default without measuring it, and suggests programming it to match the prescribed microphone response as a reasonable starting point, since the ideal telecoil response is not known.", "Shows that fitting software differs in how far the telecoil can be shaped, from overall gain only to adjustment in many frequency bands." ], "limitations": "A webinar transcript built on single-device examples and the author's own estimates of clinical practice, not a controlled study. Devices and software date from 2013. The measured study behind it is Putterman and Valente (2012), which covers one manufacturer's aids.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "telecoil-fitting", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "fcc-15-237", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/fcc-15-237/", "title": "47 CFR 15.237: operation in the bands 72.0-73.0 MHz, 74.6-74.8 MHz and 75.2-76.0 MHz", "authors": "US Federal Communications Commission", "publisher": "Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR)", "date": "2013-06-11", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Federal Communications Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/section-15.237", "summary": "The US rule for licence-free auditory assistance transmitters in the 72-76 MHz band, the older of the two US bands used by venue FM systems.", "findings": [ "Restricts transmitters in these bands to use as auditory assistance devices.", "Confines emissions to a band 200 kHz wide centred on the operating frequency, lying wholly inside 72.0-73.0, 74.6-74.8 or 75.2-76.0 MHz.", "Limits field strength inside that 200 kHz band to 80 millivolts per metre at 3 metres, measured with an average detector; emissions outside it must meet Part 15's general radiated limits (15.209).", "Part 15's definition of an auditory assistance device (15.3(a)) includes assistive listening, audio description for the blind and simultaneous language translation, for people with disabilities, people who need translation, and others who benefit in places of public gathering such as churches, theatres and auditoriums." ], "limitations": "A legal limit on the transmitter only: it sets no audio quality, range or receiver requirement. Because the definition includes language translation, interpretation systems use the same channels, and Part 15's general conditions (15.5) require these devices to cause no harmful interference and to accept interference from others. Date is the Federal Register publication of the section's latest amendment (78 FR 34927), as given in the eCFR source note; the text read was current to 6 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "fcc-2013-auditory-assistance-definition", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/fcc-2013-auditory-assistance-definition/", "title": "Definition of Auditory Assistance Device (Report and Order, ET Docket No. 10-26, FCC 13-59; final rule)", "authors": "US Federal Communications Commission", "publisher": "Federal Register, vol. 78, no. 112, pp. 34922-34928 (Government Publishing Office)", "date": "2013-06-11", "kind": "Regulation (final rule summarising an FCC report and order)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Federal Communications Commission; the proceeding began with a petition from Williams Sound, a maker of auditory assistance devices)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2013-06-11/html/2013-13696.htm", "summary": "The 2013 US rule change that let 72-76 MHz auditory assistance devices also carry simultaneous translation for anyone, and tightened their limit on unwanted emissions to protect VHF TV.", "findings": [ "Widened the Part 15 definition so that 72-76 MHz auditory assistance devices may provide auditory assistance, simultaneous translation, or both, to anyone at any location, matching the Part 95 rules for 216-217 MHz; the FCC acted on a petition from Williams Sound.", "States that the 80 mV/m at 3 m field-strength limit for these devices is equivalent to a maximum effective radiated power of 1.2 mW.", "Found no reports of harmful interference from these devices, expected their market to \"remain limited\", judged that ample spectrum was available for several applications, and said their low power lets others re-use the frequencies at nearby locations.", "Lowered the limit on unwanted emissions outside the 200 kHz bandwidth from 1,500 µV/m to the general Part 15 limit of 100 µV/m at 3 m, to protect VHF TV channels 2-6 (54-72 and 76-88 MHz), at an estimated 1-2% added cost per device.", "Allowed 18 months for new certifications under the old limit and 3 years for manufacture and import, and grandfathered installed devices for the life of the equipment so that venues are not forced to replace systems they use to meet the ADA.", "Noted that some customers may prefer \"the inherent security and privacy of infrared technology\" over RF, and left the choice of technology to the market.", "Paragraph 16 adopts a 1-2% additional per-device cost estimate for the tighter unwanted-emission limit using standard components. The regulatory flexibility analysis, section E and footnote 21, traces this estimate to Williams Sound's comments, page 3. It is a manufacturer-supplied estimate adopted by the regulator, not a measured venue expense." ], "limitations": "A summary of the report and order; the full order was not read. It concerns transmitter rules only and gives no measurements of interference or coverage. The new emission limits are in 47 CFR 15.237 (a separate record).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands", "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "schafer-huynh-2013", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/schafer-huynh-2013/", "title": "Speech recognition and subjective perceptions of neck-loop FM receivers with cochlear implants", "authors": "Schafer EC, Huynh C, Romine D, Jimenez R", "publisher": "American Journal of Audiology 22(1):53-64", "date": "2013-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (before-and-after home trial, small sample)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (University of North Texas; PubMed tags the study as having non-US-government research support without naming it; the full text, with any funding statement, could not be read)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1044/1059-0889(2012/11-0032)", "summary": "Tested whether FM receivers worn as neckloops, which feed the implant processor's telecoil, help adolescents and adults with cochlear implants in noise and at a distance.", "findings": [ "Fourteen adolescents and adults with cochlear implants used a neck-loop FM receiver during a trial period, with speech-in-noise tests with and without the FM system and a rating scale before and after the trial; most also kept a journal.", "Speech recognition in noise was significantly better with the neck-loop FM system than with the implant alone, in both sessions, with no change in performance between them.", "On average, the ratings and journals showed improvements with the FM system, compared with the implant alone, in noisy places and at a distance from the main talker or sound source.", "The authors call for research with other types of neck-loop receivers and other implant processors." ], "limitations": "Read from the abstract only; the full text could not be read, so the processors, receivers, test levels and size of the benefit are not reported here. Personal FM receivers, not a venue system: the study is evidence about the neckloop and telecoil route into the processor. Fourteen participants.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "listen-2013-loop-requirements", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2013-loop-requirements/", "title": "New Requirements for Hearing Loop Systems: Are You Meeting the Standard?", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "2013-05-22", "kind": "Manufacturer brief", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, which sold hearing loop drivers and field strength meters; the footer reads \"2013 Ampetronic Listen Technologies Corporation\", also naming the loop maker Ampetronic)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/listen_technologies_new_requirements_for_hearing_loop_systems.pdf", "summary": "A loop seller's two-page brief on what IEC 60118-4 requires and what specifiers, installers and owners should do to meet it.", "findings": [ "Lists four requirements: field strength capable of 400 mA/m RMS with a 1 kHz sine, varying no more than ±3 dB over the volume of use; frequency response within ±3 dB from 100 Hz to 5 kHz, referenced to 1 kHz; A-weighted background noise more than 32 dB below 400 mA/m, ideally 47 dB; and a subjective test.", "Calls frequency response \"the most critical requirement for loop system and the most frequently failed\", without data.", "States that \"in the US it is estimated that over 50% of Hearing Loop systems do not work when first installed\", without saying who made the estimate or on what basis.", "Says the subjective test should ideally be done by hearing aid users, and otherwise by someone from the service provider with suitable receiving equipment.", "Advises that specifications require the installed loop to meet IEC 60118-4 and require the contractor to provide test results and a certificate of conformity.", "Names poor maintenance or operation as the most common cause of failure, and asks system providers for regular checks: at minimum a loop listener and a basic field strength reading, preferably fuller tests." ], "limitations": "A sales-oriented maker's brief that promotes its own meter. The 50% estimate and the statement about frequency response give no source or data. It says IEC 60118-4 was republished in 2007, whereas the second edition is dated 2006, and it predates the 2014 edition. The date is taken from the footer code 05222013.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification" ] }, { "id": "wolfe-2013", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/wolfe-2013/", "title": "Effects of Input Processing and Type of Personal Frequency Modulation System on Speech-Recognition Performance of Adults With Cochlear Implants", "authors": "Wolfe J, Schafer E, Parkinson A, John A, Hudson M, Wheeler J, Mucci A", "publisher": "Ear and Hearing 34(1):52-62 (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins)", "date": "2013-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (within-subject, repeated-measures)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (first author at Hearts for Hearing, Oklahoma City, where participants were recruited; PubMed tags the study as having non-US-government research support without naming it; the other authors' affiliations and any funding statement are in the paywalled full text, which was not read; the processors tested were Cochlear's)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ovid.com/jnls/ear-hearing/abstract/10.1097/aud.0b013e3182611982~effects-of-input-processing-and-type-of-personal-frequency", "summary": "A study comparing a directly connected FM receiver with a neckloop into the telecoil of two Cochlear implant processors, for speech understanding in quiet and in noise.", "findings": [ "Adults with at least a year's implant use (15 in the first experiment, 16 in the second) used Cochlear's Nucleus Freedom and Nucleus 5 processors with a directly connected (direct audio input) FM receiver and with an induction neckloop receiver.", "Speech recognition in quiet did not differ between the two FM systems or between the processor conditions.", "With each processor, speech recognition in noise was better with the directly connected receiver than with the neckloop.", "The Nucleus 5's multistage automatic sensitivity control gave better results than the single-stage approach; the authors conclude that speech recognition in noise depends substantially on the processor, the FM system and how automatic sensitivity control is applied." ], "limitations": "Read from the publisher's abstract only; the full text could not be read. Personal FM receivers, not venue systems; one implant maker's processors of 2013.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "warzybok-2013", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/warzybok-2013/", "title": "Effects of spatial and temporal integration of a single early reflection on speech intelligibility", "authors": "Warzybok A, Rennies J, Brand T, Doclo S, Kollmeier B", "publisher": "Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 133(1):269-282", "date": "2013-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Medical Physics, University of Oldenburg; the abstract names no funder, and PubMed indexes the work as non-US government research support)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23297901/", "summary": "Speech-in-noise tests with a talker's speech plus one delayed copy of it, at delays from 0 to 200 ms, to find when a late copy stops helping and starts to harm intelligibility.", "findings": [ "Measured speech reception thresholds with frontal target speech plus a single reflection of it delayed by 0 to 200 ms, varying the reflection's direction and whether the interfering noise came from the front, all around or one side.", "With the reflection from the front, the delayed copy was fully integrated with the direct sound up to a delay of at least 25 ms, after which intelligibility gradually declined as the delay grew.", "At 200 ms, the delayed copy made intelligibility worse than the direct sound alone.", "When the delayed copy came from a different direction from the direct sound, the harm at 200 ms was reduced in every spatially separated condition tested." ], "limitations": "Only the abstract was read; the full paper is behind the publisher's paywall, so the number of listeners, their hearing and the relative level of the delayed copy could not be checked (PubMed's indexing lists adults and young adults). Laboratory conditions with a single reflection; it does not test a stream from an assistive listening system or delays beyond 200 ms.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "zvei-2013-induction-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/zvei-2013-induction-loops/", "title": "Induktive Höranlagen: Barrierefreies Planen und Bauen für Hörgeschädigte (Induction loop systems: accessible planning and building for people with hearing loss)", "authors": "ZVEI (German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers' Association), sound systems working group", "publisher": "ZVEI (Zentralverband Elektrotechnik- und Elektronikindustrie)", "date": "2013-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Trade body guidance (in German)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (ZVEI, the German electrical and electronic manufacturers' association, through the sound systems working group of its security division; the PDF metadata names Claus-Peter Sterling as author)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.zvei.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Verband/Fachverbaende/Sicherheit/Fachkreis_Beschallungstechnik/LGB-Induktive-Hoeranlagen.pdf", "summary": "A German industry association's short guide to planning induction loops that meet EN 60118-4.", "findings": [ "States that in most cases a visitor who switches a hearing aid to T in one of the many existing public loops hears little more, and blames wrong planning of the loop and amplifier; it gives no survey or measurements.", "Gives the EN 60118-4 requirements as a frequency response within ±3 dB from 100 Hz to 5,000 Hz relative to 1 kHz, a recommended field strength of 100 mA/m ±3 dB and a maximum of 400 mA/m, citing the 1999 German edition, and says these values must be checked and recorded at commissioning.", "Says ordinary 100 V public-address amplifiers driving a loop cannot meet these requirements because high frequencies are lost, which it gives as the reason older loops gained a reputation for poor quality.", "Claims that loops commissioned to the standard are \"praktisch weitgehend wartungsfrei\" (in practice largely maintenance-free)." ], "limitations": "Trade body guidance with no data behind its statements about existing loops or maintenance. It cites the 1999 edition of the standard, since replaced by the 2006 and 2014 editions. The document is dated January 2013 (\"Stand 1/2013\").", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification", "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "abtt-2013-hearing-assistance", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/abtt-2013-hearing-assistance/", "title": "Management of Hearing Assistance Systems in Auditoria", "authors": "Association of British Theatre Technicians", "publisher": "Association of British Theatre Technicians (ABTT)", "date": "2013-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Industry guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Association of British Theatre Technicians, a UK membership association for the theatre technical industry; no author or funder is named)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.abtt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Management-of-Hearing-Assistance-Systems-in-Auditoria2013.pdf", "summary": "A two-page UK theatre industry guide to running loop and infrared systems in auditoria, covering signs, advertising, staff training and notices when a system is out of order.", "findings": [ "Says the existence of a hearing assistance system, and the type in use, should be made clear in all advertising material.", "Calls it vitally important that all box office and front-of-house staff are trained so that patrons know the system exists and which type it is, especially with infrared because the theatre must supply the receiver, and that staff know which seats are covered where coverage is partial.", "Asks for a designated member of staff to check regularly that the system works and, when a fault cannot be fixed before the next performance, for prominent notices saying the system is not working, with box office and front-of-house staff told.", "Shows two different signs: the ear-and-bar symbol with a T for a loop, for hearing aids with a T switch, and an ear with wavy lines for infrared.", "Advises stating in venue contracts that the loop will be on at all times, because touring companies may ask for it to be switched off." ], "limitations": "Brief guidance with no data. It predates Auracast in venues and notes only that some Bluetooth systems were becoming available. The date is the 2013 copyright line; the file was created in July 2015. It cites the 2004 edition of Approved Document M.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "newton-2012-marriott-theatre-loop", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/newton-2012-marriott-theatre-loop/", "title": "\"Getting looped\" was a great investment and a priceless gift to our theater's patrons", "authors": "Newton M (Marriott Theatre, Lincolnshire, Illinois)", "publisher": "Hearing Health & Technology Matters (Hearing Views blog)", "date": "2012-10-10", "kind": "Article (venue manager's blog post)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Independent (written by Margaret Newton, business manager of the Marriott Theatre, about the theatre's own loop; the theatre says a local audiologist with patients among its subscribers proposed the loop; who installed or paid for it is not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared" ], "url": "https://hearinghealthmatters.org/hearingviews/2012/looping-our-theater-was-a-great-investment-and-a-priceless-gift-to-our-patrons/", "summary": "The business manager of an Illinois theatre describes replacing its infrared system with a hearing loop and how patrons responded.", "findings": [ "Says the theatre formerly used an infrared system that was satisfactory for some patrons but left many others unable to understand the dialogue; it raised the volume, but the sound quality was poor, and the theatre lost many long-standing patrons with hearing loss.", "Says a local audiologist with many patients among the theatre's subscribers approached the theatre about two years earlier about installing a loop.", "Reports that the theatre had not realised how many patrons already had telecoils in their hearing devices, that it gets thanks at every performance, and that subscribers are returning and telling friends.", "Describes the new devices as easy, comfortable and sanitary because the headphones are not placed inside the ear." ], "limitations": "A venue's own enthusiastic account, with no figures on use, no measurements, no cost and no description of the loop or of the devices mentioned. Published on a hearing-industry blog. One US theatre in 2012.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas", "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "icc-2012-accessibility-comparison", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/icc-2012-accessibility-comparison/", "title": "The 2010 ADA Standard for Accessible Design/2012 International Building Code with 2009 ICC A117.1 Comparison Matrix", "authors": "Kimberly Paarlberg, ICC", "publisher": "International Code Council", "date": "2012-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Standards comparison with reproduced code text", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Code Council; matrix developed for ICC by Kimberly Paarlberg)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://media.iccsafe.org/news/codes%26standards-news/2012v2n4/ComparisonMatrix.pdf", "summary": "ICC reproduces the earlier model-code and equipment-standard requirements, including a stadium ticket-window rule already present in the 2012 IBC.", "findings": [ "The introduction dates the matrix to September 2012 and states that the 2012 IBC references ICC A117.1-2009.", "Pages 120-123 reproduce IBC 1108.2.7 and its receiver provisions. Section 1108.2.7.2 requires at least one ticket window at each location in stadiums and arenas to have an assistive listening system.", "Page 273 reproduces A117.1-2009 section 706: mono receiver jacks, neckloops for hearing-aid compatibility, output of 110 to 118 dB SPL with a 50 dB volume range, at least 18 dB signal-to-noise ratio for internally generated noise and no more than 18 dB of clipping relative to speech peaks.", "The reproduced 2009 section has no separate hearing-loop clause between receiver jacks and hearing-aid compatibility." ], "limitations": "Read the title, introduction and assistive-listening extracts of the 330-page matrix. It is a publisher comparison with reproduced provisions, not the complete individual codes. Edition years are not exact publication dates or dates of local adoption.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status" ] }, { "id": "gentner-2012-loop-fm-ir", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/gentner-2012-loop-fm-ir/", "title": "A Comparison of Loop, FM & IR Technologies for Assistive Listening", "authors": "Gentner R", "publisher": "SynAudCon (prosoundtraining.com)", "date": "2012-05-23", "kind": "Manufacturer article (blog post on an audio training site)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (written by Russ Gentner, co-founder of Listen Technologies, which then sold RF and infrared assistive listening systems; the article does not state the author's role: a 2017 Hearing Review report on an industry award describes the author as the company's co-founder, president and CEO)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.prosoundtraining.com/2012/05/23/a-comparison-of-loop-fm-ir-technologies-for-assistive-listening/", "summary": "A short comparison, by the head of an RF and infrared maker, of loops, RF and infrared for venues, giving rough system prices and the reasons it sees for the cost difference.", "findings": [ "Gives the two main advantages of RF and infrared as low cost and the ability to carry several audio sources, and puts a typical RF system at less than $5,000 and an infrared system at less than $10,000 for an average venue, with \"Loop systems are much more\".", "Attributes the difference to the building: RF and infrared need no modification of the building, while a loop is typically installed in the floor of the entire venue and must be carefully designed for complete coverage and no interference with equipment, which it says makes loops cost much more, especially in retrofits.", "Says most facilities need about four infrared radiators, and that one RF transmitter can cover an entire theatre or stadium.", "Gives the Kennedy Center as a venue that uses infrared for assistive listening, audio description and audio instruction, and says it does not use a loop because it must transmit several sources.", "Notes that loops let telecoil users listen without a receiver, while everyone else, including hearing-aid users without a telecoil, needs a receiver and earphones; telecoil users can also use RF or infrared through a neckloop." ], "limitations": "A maker's blog post with round figures and no breakdown of what the prices include (receivers, installation, design). By August 2013 the author's company also sold hearing loops: its costed loop examples from that month are a separate record in this library. Prices are US dollars of 2012.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "putterman-valente-2012", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/putterman-valente-2012/", "title": "Difference Between the Default Telecoil (T-Coil) and Programmed Microphone Frequency Response in Behind-the-Ear (BTE) Hearing Aids", "authors": "Putterman DB, Valente M", "publisher": "Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 23(5):366-378", "date": "2012-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (coupler measurements)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine; supported by NIH National Center for Research Resources grant TL1 RR024995; Frye Electronics provided test equipment)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4354810/", "summary": "Measured how a hearing aid's default telecoil setting compares with its microphone setting after the microphone has been fitted to a prescription.", "findings": [ "Measured 52 behind-the-ear hearing aids from one manufacturer, returned from repair to a university clinic, whose microphone programs had been fitted to the NAL-NL1 prescription with the telecoil left at the manufacturer's default.", "In a 2-cc coupler, averaged over 11 frequencies, the default telecoil and the programmed microphone gave about the same output.", "Frequency by frequency, the default telecoil was significantly quieter than the programmed microphone at 200 Hz (by 15.2 dB on average) and 400 Hz (by 6.0 dB), and louder at 4,000 to 6,300 Hz (by about 6 to 7 dB). The discussion sums up the 200-400 Hz shortfall as 6 dB. The authors suggest the low-frequency shortfall may explain why users complain the telecoil is not loud enough.", "Shows that the standard single-number check (RSETS, a high-frequency average) can look close to zero while the low frequencies are cut, so it can miss this mismatch.", "Also reports pilot real-ear measurements with a speech-weighted signal on 39 of the aids, in which the default telecoil was 20.9 dB below the programmed microphone at 200 Hz and 12.6 dB at 400 Hz, offered to encourage equipment makers and standards writers to support speech-like telecoil test signals; a few aids from a second manufacturer appeared to match more closely, but there were too few to analyse.", "The pilot real-ear section used a silicone demonstrator ear on a tripod, not measurements in participants' ears. The microphone input was 70 dB SPL; the authors later established that 65 dB SPL would have matched the 56.2 mA/m telecoil input.", "The acknowledgments identify NIH NCRR grant TL1 RR024995 and equipment provided by Frye Electronics (FP40 telewand, footswitch and demonstrator ear); they do not specify that it was lent. The Figure 5 explanation defines positive differences as microphone output greater than telecoil output.", "The readable abstract independently confirms 52 hearing aids from one maker in the coupler condition, 39 in the real-ear pilot, and significantly lower mean telecoil output at 200 and 400 Hz. It gives neither the size of those differences nor the repair history. The archived bibliographic metadata identifies NIH grant TL1 RR024995." ], "limitations": "One manufacturer's aids, measured in a coupler with no listener outcomes. The study concerns telephone listening; the authors note that telecoils also receive loops and neckloops, but loop listening was not tested. The authors note a level mismatch in the real-ear pilot. One Results sentence reverses the direction of the frequency-specific differences; the abstract, discussion and Figure 5 sign convention support lower telecoil output at 200 and 400 Hz. This record cites the authors' manuscript in PubMed Central.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "seidler-2012-daga", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/seidler-2012-daga/", "title": "Induktive Höranlagen in Kinos und Kongressräumen (Hearing loops in cinemas and conference rooms)", "authors": "Seidler H", "publisher": "Fortschritte der Akustik, DAGA 2012, Darmstadt (German Acoustical Society), pp. 97-98", "date": "2012-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Conference paper (short paper with measurements)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (TU Dresden, ear, nose and throat clinic of the Carl Gustav Carus university hospital); funding not stated", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://pub.dega-akustik.de/DAGA_2012/data/articles/000413.pdf", "summary": "A German acoustician's short paper on what hearing loops achieve in reverberant rooms, their physical limits (spill, metal, magnetic interference) and how phased loop arrays address them in cinemas and conference rooms.", "findings": [ "Figure 1 on printed page 97 identifies seats 260 and 464 and labels the measure STI-PA. Both loop bars exceed the caption's 0.75 threshold for excellent intelligibility and the other plotted conditions. The surrounding text cites Seidler's 2009 work, listed as reference 2 on page 98; the 2012 paper does not name the room, its country, measurement date or instrument.", "Compares the Speech Transmission Index at two seats in a reverberant room for normal hearing, hearing aids, hearing aids with the sound system, and the loop, and reports a very clear rise to excellent intelligibility with the loop (the chart's scale labels values above 0.75 excellent).", "Explains that the telecoil uses only the vertical component of the loop's field and that, because the loop and the listeners' heads are at different heights, the signal is about equally strong near the cable and in the middle of the room.", "Names three limits: a field that spreads about three loop widths outside the loop into neighbouring rooms; metal structures that change the field, affecting high frequencies more than low; and interfering magnetic fields from unbalanced electrical installations and poorly suppressed switchgear, which it says planning and correct installation can largely prevent.", "Says phased arrays of two offset, phase-shifted figure-of-eight loops cut the field by about 20 dB at about 1 m outside the covered area, limit vertical spread because the segments are narrow (1-4 m), compensate frequency-dependent metal losses, and let rooms of any shape be covered.", "Notes that in such arrays the horizontal field component along the laying axis is also even, though about 3 dB lower, so hearing aid and implant users whose pickup coil lies horizontally can also use them.", "Says arrays need design by a specialist planner and final measurement to the standard, and that loops built this way work reliably with little maintenance once construction is complete." ], "limitations": "A two-page conference summary: the STI results are shown only as a chart, the room and loop are not described, and the spill and array figures are given without the measurements behind them. The layout figure is credited to a maker's system (Humantechnik/Univox). The reliability statement is the author's view, without data. The conference ran on 19-22 March 2012.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-limits", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "hazrati-loizou-2012", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hazrati-loizou-2012/", "title": "The combined effects of reverberation and noise on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners", "authors": "Hazrati O, Loizou PC", "publisher": "International Journal of Audiology 51(6):437-443", "date": "2012-02-22", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (University of Texas at Dallas; funded by the US National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, grant R01 DC010494; the authors report no conflicts of interest)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3733354/", "summary": "Measured how reverberation, noise and both together reduce word recognition for adult cochlear implant users.", "findings": [ "Eleven adult implant users (Nucleus Freedom, ESPrit 3G and Nucleus 5) identified words in sentences fed through the auxiliary input of a research processor, in quiet, with reverberation (T60 of 0.6 and 0.8 s), with speech-shaped noise (+5 and +10 dB SNR), and with both.", "Mean scores fell from 87% in anechoic quiet to 44% with a reverberation time of 0.6 s and 33% with 0.8 s.", "Reverberation reduced intelligibility more than noise at the SNRs tested, and the two together more than either alone; even in the most favourable combined condition, mean scores did not exceed 50%.", "The authors conclude that testing implant users in noise alone may underestimate the difficulties they meet in daily life, where reverberation and noise often coexist.", "Methods, Simulated reverberant conditions, reports that the room impulse responses were recorded at a source-to-microphone distance of 5.5 m, beyond critical distance. The direct-to-reverberant ratios were −1.83 dB at 0.6 s and −3.00 dB at 0.8 s; this was a fixed-distance simulation, not a test across talker distances." ], "limitations": "Simulated reverberation fed directly into a research processor, not real rooms or the users' own processors; eleven participants; no assistive listening system was tested, and the paper specifies the distance used to record the room responses but does not test different talker distances or discuss remote microphones.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants", "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "williams-av-2012-95khz-bulletin", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-av-2012-95khz-bulletin/", "title": "95 kHz Infrared Systems: High Efficiency Fluorescent Lighting (Technical Bulletin MFRM 017A)", "authors": "Williams Sound", "publisher": "Williams Sound (now Williams AV)", "date": "2012-02-14", "kind": "Manufacturer technical bulletin", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams Sound, now a brand of Williams AV, which sells infrared systems on 2.3-3.8 MHz carriers)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tech_bulletin_95kHz_IR_Systems_and_fluorescent_lighting.pdf", "summary": "A one-page maker's bulletin warning that high-frequency, high-efficiency fluorescent lighting interferes with all infrared hearing systems on 95 kHz.", "findings": [ "States that 95 kHz has historically been the most used frequency for infrared hearing assistance and interpretation installations, and that high-frequency, high-efficiency fluorescent lighting interferes with every 95 kHz system, whatever the brand.", "Advises finding out whether such lighting is installed or planned in a venue where infrared is being considered, and not considering 95 kHz systems if it is.", "Suggests specifying a system that operates on 250 kHz or higher, such as the MHz carriers it names, which it says will operate effectively with high-efficiency lighting." ], "limitations": "A short maker's bulletin without measurements; its list of carriers reads \"2.3/2.8/3.3/2.8 MHz\", repeating 2.8. It says nothing about LED lighting. Date from the PDF's creation date; the bulletin carries a 2012 copyright.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "infrared-limits" ] }, { "id": "nz-2011-g5-interior-environment", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nz-2011-g5-interior-environment/", "title": "New Zealand Building Code Clause G5: Interior Environment, First Edition, Amendment 2", "authors": "Department of Building and Housing", "publisher": "New Zealand Government (Building Performance)", "date": "2011-10-10", "kind": "Building code and approved guidance", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (New Zealand Department of Building and Housing)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.building.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/building-code-compliance/g-services-and-facilities/g5-interior-environment/asvm/g5-interior-environment-1st-edition-amendment-2.pdf", "summary": "The government publication reproduces the national building-code requirement for enhanced listening in specified assembly spaces and the associated sign requirement.", "findings": [ "The document's amendment history dates Amendment 2 to 10 October 2011. The reproduced page containing G5.3.5-G5.3.6 is marked July 1992; the amendment date is not the date the hearing provision was introduced.", "G5.3.5 requires listening systems that enable enhanced hearing by people with hearing aids. Its application limits are communal non-residential assembly spaces occupied by more than 250 people; any theatre, cinema or public hall; and assembly spaces in old people's homes occupied by more than 20 people.", "G5.3.6 requires enhanced listening systems to be identified by signs meeting Clause F8. These two provisions name no transmission technology, receiver quantity or numerical coverage target.", "The opening explanation distinguishes the Building Code from an acceptable solution or verification method: a design following the latter must be accepted as meeting the related code provisions, but other means are possible." ], "limitations": "Read the government publication's introductory material and reproduced G5 provisions, especially printed pages 3-4. This is the 2011 consolidated publication, not a survey of subsequent legislation or local decisions. The separately referenced NZS 4121:2001 and F8 technical sign provisions were not read. No receiver counts or loop mandate are inferred from those references.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "baskent-2011", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/baskent-2011/", "title": "Audiovisual asynchrony detection and speech intelligibility in noise with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing impairment", "authors": "Başkent D, Bazo D", "publisher": "Ear and Hearing 32(5):582-592", "date": "2011-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Manufacturer (Starkey Hearing Research Center affiliation)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21389856/", "summary": "Measured how sensitive listeners with and without hearing loss are to a time offset between a talker's voice and face, and whether that sensitivity relates to understanding speech in noise.", "findings": [ "11 adults with normal hearing aged 23 to 50 and 11 with moderate to severe hearing loss aged 54 to 81, judged whether audiovisual sentences were in sync across a range of offsets.", "All listeners had a synchrony window on the order of a few hundred milliseconds; the average window did not differ between the groups, though individuals varied widely.", "Window width and centre were not related to age or degree of hearing loss; listeners with narrower windows tended to understand speech in noise better.", "The authors conclude that audio or video delays in communication systems would affect listeners with hearing loss much as they affect others, and that such delays should be limited because these listeners rely on visual cues." ], "limitations": "Only the abstract was read; an erratum was published in 2012. Small groups, recorded sentences, and no assistive listening system in the chain.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "dwp-2011-making-meetings-accessible", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dwp-2011-making-meetings-accessible/", "title": "A handy guide to: Making meetings accessible", "authors": "Department for Work and Pensions and the UK Advisory Forum on Ageing (guides commissioned by the English Forums on Ageing)", "publisher": "Department for Work and Pensions (GOV.UK, series Good practice on holding meetings with older people)", "date": "2011-08-05", "kind": "Government guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Department for Work and Pensions, published with the UK Advisory Forum on Ageing)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7b6baee5274a34770eb93b/making-meetings-accessible.pdf", "summary": "A short UK government guide for meeting organisers on including people with hearing or sight loss, with advice on running a meeting with a loop.", "findings": [ "Says that a single microphone attached to a loop causes problems when several people contribute, and that ideally several \"roving\" microphones should be available to pass round.", "Asks that loops be switched on and tested before meetings begin, that the microphone be passed to each speaker in turn, and that only one person speak into the microphone.", "Asks that mobile phones be switched off completely, since they can interfere with hearing aids, and that organisers ask the venue's sound engineer how the microphones work and how best to speak into them.", "Notes that room loops can be fixed or portable, and that not all hearing aids have a T position." ], "limitations": "Brief good-practice advice based on members' experience of meetings with older people, without data; it covers loops only and dates from 2011.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers", "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "listen-2011-stationary-ir-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2011-stationary-ir-manual/", "title": "Stationary IR System Manual (design guide and user manuals for the LT-82 transmitter, LA-140 radiator and LR-42 and LR-44 receivers)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies; copy hosted by the reseller Full Compass", "date": "2011-05-04", "kind": "Manufacturer design guide and user manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the infrared products described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.fullcompass.com/common/files/24148-ListenTechnologiesStationaryIRSystemManual.pdf", "summary": "An earlier edition of the maker's infrared design guide and user manuals, with its advice on choosing between under-chin and lanyard receivers and on batteries and charging.", "findings": [ "Compares its two receiver types: the stethoscope-style receiver worn under the chin \"makes it simple to dispense the units and prevents cord tangling\" but is uncomfortable for some guests, especially over long periods; the lanyard receiver takes many types of earphones but is more complicated to hand out, and its cords can tangle.", "Gives receiver battery life as about 30 hours on AAA alkaline batteries and about 15 hours on its rechargeable pack, which needs its 8-unit charging station (up to 9 hours to charge), and offers replacement ear tips for the stethoscope receiver.", "Advises ordering neckloops for customers with telecoil hearing aids.", "Specifies the stethoscope receiver's audio response as 63 Hz to 15 kHz (+/- 3 dB) on four carriers (2.3, 2.8, 3.3 and 3.8 MHz), with squelch on loss of signal.", "Gives the same design notes as the maker's 2022 manual: line of sight in open space, wider coverage from light, reflective surfaces, less susceptibility to fluorescent lighting thanks to higher carriers but no immunity to sunlight or plasma displays, and compatibility with other makers' systems on the same carriers." ], "limitations": "The maker's descriptions of its own products, without measurements. The copy read is hosted by a reseller; no copy was found on the maker's site. Date from the PDF's creation date (4 May 2011); one section carries a 2008 copyright.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "infrared-limits", "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "aaa-2011-hat-guidelines", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/aaa-2011-hat-guidelines/", "title": "Clinical Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years (Includes Supplement A)", "authors": "American Academy of Audiology Hearing Assistance Technology Task Force (Johnson CD, chair; Anderson V, Boothroyd A, Eiten L, Gabbard SA, Lewis D, Thibodeau L)", "publisher": "American Academy of Audiology", "date": "2011-04-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Professional guidance (clinical practice guideline)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (American Academy of Audiology, the professional association of audiologists; prepared by the Hearing Assistance Technology Task Force of its Strategic Documents Committee)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/HAT_Guidelines_Supplement_A.pdf_53996ef7758497.54419000.pdf", "summary": "The Academy's guideline on remote-microphone hearing assistance technology for children, issued in April 2008 and updated in April 2011, whose loop supplement was still to come.", "findings": [ "Lists induction loop systems, which deliver speech to the telecoil of a hearing aid, cochlear implant or other hearing device, as one of four delivery options for remote-microphone technology.", "Gives fitting and verification procedures for ear-level FM (Supplement A) and classroom audio distribution systems (Supplement B), and lists Supplement C, \"Induction Loop System Fitting and Verification Procedures\", as under development; the text adds that a future supplement will describe neckloop induction technology.", "Defines transparency as the condition in which equal inputs to the wireless and local microphones produce equal outputs from the hearing device." ], "limitations": "Written for children and youth and mostly about personal remote-microphone systems. A search on 9 October 2026 found no published Supplement C; this record reports only what the 2011 update says.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "ca4-2011-feldman-pro-football", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ca4-2011-feldman-pro-football/", "title": "Feldman v. Pro Football, Inc., Nos. 09-1021 and 09-1023 (unpublished opinion)", "authors": "US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit", "publisher": "US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit", "date": "2011-03-25", "kind": "Regulatory interpretation (court decision)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US federal appellate court opinion)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/Unpublished/091021.U.pdf", "summary": "The court affirmed a Maryland stadium ruling requiring access beyond listening devices for three spectators who could not benefit from those devices; the opinion expressly lacks binding precedential status in the circuit.", "findings": [ "The decision of 25 March 2011 affirmed the District of Maryland judgment concerning FedEx Field in Landover. Page 2 states that unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in the circuit.", "Pages 4-5 describe three deaf or hard-of-hearing plaintiffs unable to benefit from the stadium’s assistive listening devices. Pages 22-25 hold that, in this stadium context, access beyond those devices was needed for game information, emergency and public announcements, and music and entertainment words carried by the public-address system.", "The majority affirmed a declaratory judgment requiring auxiliary access but did not require a particular form of aid. Page 11 records that the district court declined to order captioning as the specific means of access to lyrics and that typed lyrics were then made available before games.", "The defendants did not assert undue burden or fundamental alteration as defences to the content at issue. The majority treated what effective communication required as dependent on the goods and services offered in context.", "The partial dissent agreed that the listening devices did not effectively communicate to these plaintiffs, but disputed the breadth of the declaration about access to all aural content and argued for evaluating the effectiveness of the aids actually supplied." ], "limitations": "This is a historical, unpublished appellate opinion about three litigants and one stadium, not a technology comparison or a statement of current law across all US jurisdictions. Captioning was central to the litigation; it is included only to show the boundary of the venue listening path for people who could not use it. No claim is made that the court ordered another listening-system technology.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "complaints-and-cases" ] }, { "id": "comtek-2011-bst-75-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/comtek-2011-bst-75-manual/", "title": "BST-75 Synthesized Base Station Transmitter Operator's Manual (72-76 MHz)", "authors": "COMTEK Communications Technology", "publisher": "COMTEK Communications Technology (downloads page)", "date": "2011-01-18", "kind": "Manufacturer operator's manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (COMTEK Communications Technology, which sells 72-76 MHz and 216 MHz transmitters and receivers for assistive listening, language interpretation and other uses)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/414496dc-67ac-402c-ac0d-00342b1b241d/downloads/BST-75%20Mmanual.pdf", "summary": "A maker's manual for the 72-76 MHz base station in its large-area assistive listening kit for houses of worship, theatres and auditoriums, with its rules for running several transmitters.", "findings": [ "States that the transmitter operates in 72-76 MHz under FCC Part 90 at up to 120 mW, which the maker says gives \"greater range and reliability than customary FCC Part 15 systems\".", "Warns that when more than two transmitters are used in the same area, intermodulation can cause interference, and that frequencies must then be coordinated by choosing them from one of its frequency groups (at 72 MHz, groups of four, three and two channels).", "Advises that transmitters in different frequency groups be separated by twice the operating area, with at least 100 ft (about 30 m) between group operating areas.", "Offers 88 programmable channels between 72.020 and 75.980 MHz, companded or non-companded to suit different receivers, with an audio response of 80 Hz to 10 kHz.", "Its specifications state the transmitter is type-accepted under FCC Part 90." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's manual without measurements. It does not say whether a licence is needed to operate under Part 90 or how the separation rule was derived. Dated by its print line (18 January 2011); the maker's downloads page still offers it, alongside a 216 MHz model whose manual gives the same multi-transmitter rules.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "rf-fm-bands", "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "current-thinking-2011-irmtx750-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/current-thinking-2011-irmtx750-manual/", "title": "IRMTX750 Infra Red Modulator & Radiator: Installation and Maintenance Manual (Revision 2)", "authors": "Current Thinking Ltd", "publisher": "Current Thinking Ltd (Infra~Hear range); copy hosted by a French audiovisual reseller", "date": "2011-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Manufacturer installation manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Current Thinking Ltd, a UK maker of the Infra~Hear infrared assistive listening products described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.la-bs.com/Objets/IRMTX750_me.pdf", "summary": "A small UK maker's installation and maintenance manual for its infrared modulator-radiator, covering interference, placement near windows, commissioning coverage and a maintenance schedule.", "findings": [ "States that its system uses Band IV modulation as defined in BS EN 61603-2 and occupies channel H1 (2.3 MHz), \"and as such is largely immune to interference from traditional sources such as high efficiency lighting and plasma displays\".", "Says the prime coverage is line of sight, but reflections from most hard surfaces give main and reflected coverage when radiators are mounted high; blackout curtains and some red and purple paints affect coverage, so units should be mounted temporarily and tested before final positions are chosen.", "States that \"IR radiation does not reflect of most glass surfaces\", so radiators should point away from windows.", "Warns against using several modulators in overlapping areas, which causes beat frequencies and poor audio; larger areas use slave radiators.", "Asks commissioning to survey the area with a receiver, normally to cover at least 90% of the used seating, and to mark seats not covered on a room plan displayed so that users can choose covered seats.", "The maintenance schedule recommends monthly receiver listening in the covered area to check that sound is heard without distortion, quarterly checks of each input separately and its received quality, and a yearly engineer visit to check inputs and the field strength at neckloop receivers with a calibrated meter (page 2)." ], "limitations": "The maker's claims for its own product, without measurements. The maker's web address now redirects elsewhere, and the copy read is hosted by a reseller. The cover says Revision 2, January 2011, while page footers say Rev 2 Jan 2010; the PDF was created in February 2011. Written before LED lighting was common.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "infrared-limits", "neckloops", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "ada-2010", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ada-2010/", "title": "2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design", "authors": "US Department of Justice", "publisher": "US Department of Justice (ada.gov)", "date": "2010-09-15", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ada.gov/law-and-regs/design-standards/2010-stds/", "summary": "US accessibility design standards, including assistive listening systems.", "findings": [ "Sections 101.1 and 201.1 apply the design requirements to newly designed or constructed facilities and altered portions of existing facilities; the accompanying Title III regulation, section 36.406, sets the applicable construction dates.", "The introduction sets minimum requirements for newly designed, constructed or altered facilities and describes the standards as a reference for structural changes for Title II program access and readily achievable barrier removal under Title III.", "In the 2,001-and-over row of Table 219.3, both the additional receiver per 100 seats over 2,000 and the hearing-aid-compatible receiver per four receivers include any fraction thereof, requiring upward rounding.", "Section 106.5 defines an assistive listening system as one using transmitters, receivers and coupling devices to bypass the acoustical space between a sound source and a listener \"by means of induction loop, radio frequency, infrared, or direct-wired equipment\".", "Section 219 requires an assistive listening system in each assembly area where audible communication is integral to the use of the space, except, outside courtrooms, where no audio amplification is provided. Table 219.3 sets receiver numbers by seating capacity; at least 25%, and no fewer than two, must be hearing-aid compatible.", "Section 219.3 requires receivers that meet 706.2 (a 1/8 inch mono jack). Where several assembly areas in one building are under one management, receivers may be counted from the building's total seats, provided that all receivers are usable with all systems.", "Hearing-aid-compatible receivers must work with telecoils through neckloops (706.3); the advisory adds that earbuds, earphones and over-the-ear headsets are not hearing-aid compatible. Where an induction loop serves every seat, only the hearing-aid-compatible share of Table 219.3 is waived; the other receivers are still required.", "Section 103 allows other designs, products or technologies that give substantially equivalent or greater accessibility and usability. Its advisory puts the burden of demonstrating this on the venue if challenged and says that, outside transit facilities, there is no process for certifying an alternative design.", "Section 706 sets system performance: receivers with a 1/8 inch mono jack, 110 to 118 dB SPL with a 50 dB volume-control range, signal-to-noise at least 18 dB, and peak clipping no more than 18 dB.", "Section 216.10 requires signs, with the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss, informing patrons that the system is available.", "The standards do not mention Bluetooth, Auracast, Wi-Fi or phones; Advisory 706.1 groups systems into hard-wired systems and three wireless types: induction loop, infrared and FM radio.", "Advisory 706.1 says an FM system may be better than infrared in some open-air assemblies because infrared signals are less effective in sunlight, and that infrared is typically the better choice where confidential transmission matters because it stays within the space.", "Table 219.3 sets the receivers required by seating capacity: for 51 to 500 seats, 2 plus 1 per 25 seats over 50; for 501 to 1,000, 20 plus 1 per 33 over 500; for 1,001 to 2,000, 35 plus 1 per 50 over 1,000; for 2,001 and over, 55 plus 1 per 100 over 2,000.", "Table 219.3 requires two receivers, both hearing-aid compatible, for 50 seats or fewer. The 51–200-seat row requires two plus one per 25 seats over 50, rounding up any fraction, with two hearing-aid-compatible receivers. Thus 100 seats require four receivers, including two hearing-aid-compatible receivers, before applying the section's exceptions.", "Advisory 706.3 says neckloops, and headsets that can be worn as neckloops, are compatible with hearing aids.", "Section 810.7 requires that where public address systems convey audible information to the public, the same or equivalent information is provided in a visual format.", "Defines assembly areas to include courtrooms, public meeting rooms, public hearing rooms and legislative chambers, among others.", "The assembly-area definition in section 106.5 also includes convention centres. Section 219.2 imposes no minimum seating capacity or fixed-seating condition.", "Section 106.5 includes educational gatherings in the assembly-area definition and names classrooms, lecture halls, auditoria, arenas and stadiums among its examples. Section 201.2 says that each portion of a space with more than one use must meet the requirements for that use.", "The 201–500-seat row of Table 219.3 requires two receivers plus one per 25 seats over 50, and one hearing-aid-compatible receiver per four receivers, rounding fractions upward. Applying that row to 300 seats gives 12 receivers, three hearing-aid compatible, before the exceptions apply.", "Section 810.7 is part of section 810, Transportation Facilities.", "The introduction dates publication of the revised Title II and Title III regulations adopting these standards to 15 September 2010. The Title II timing provisions (35.151(c)) require the 2010 Standards for construction commencing on or after 15 March 2012. The Title III introduction and 36.406(a) use the last permit application or extension completion/receipt date, or physical construction start where no permit is required, with the same 15 March 2012 threshold.", "Table 219.3 includes fractions in every additional seat increment and in the one-per-four receiver share; section 104.2 also requires ratios or percentages that leave a fraction to be rounded up to the next whole number.", "Sections 215 and 702 address fire alarms separately from sections 219 and 706 on assistive listening. Section 702.1 calls for permanently installed audible and visible alarms and incorporates the 1999 or 2002 editions of NFPA 72, with specified provisions and exceptions; it does not incorporate every subsequent edition automatically.", "Section 215.1 applies where a fire alarm system provides audible coverage. Its existing-facility exception requires visible alarms only when an existing fire alarm system is upgraded or replaced, or a new one is installed. Section 215.2 directs public and common use areas to section 702; section 702.1 permits industry practice for fire alarms in medical care facilities. Advisory 215.1 says other emergency alarms, such as tornado warnings, are outside section 702's technical criteria, and recommends consultation with local fire departments and evacuation plans considering every occupant, including people with disabilities.", "The exception to section 216.10 allows availability signs at every ticket office or window instead of signs at each assembly area. The signs follow section 703.5 on visual characters and section 703.7.2.4 on the hearing-loss access symbol." ], "limitations": "Written before Auracast existed. Unless stated otherwise, the advisory notes explain or illustrate the requirements and do not establish enforceable requirements, as the standards themselves say.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "audio-level", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "wifi-networks", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "transport", "places-of-worship", "neckloops", "courts-and-chambers", "theatres-and-cinemas", "stadiums-and-arenas", "hotels-and-conference-centres", "lecture-halls", "museums-and-tours", "school-auditoriums", "emergency-announcements", "audience-need", "procurement" ] }, { "id": "doj-2010-title-ii-communications", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2010-title-ii-communications/", "title": "28 CFR 35.160: communications (ADA Title II regulation)", "authors": "US Department of Justice", "publisher": "eCFR", "date": "2010-09-15", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-28/section-35.160", "summary": "The ADA rule that requires state and local governments, among them courts and councils, to communicate as effectively with people with disabilities as with others, and to give primary consideration to the aid a person asks for.", "findings": [ "Requires a public entity to take appropriate steps so that communication with applicants, participants, members of the public and companions with disabilities is as effective as communication with others.", "Section 35.160(a)(2) defines a companion as a family member, friend or associate of someone seeking a public service, where the companion is also an appropriate person for the public entity to communicate with.", "Requires appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to give people with disabilities an equal opportunity to take part in and benefit from a service, program or activity. The definitions in the same part (section 35.104) list assistive listening devices and assistive listening systems among the aids for people who are deaf or hard of hearing.", "Says the aid needed varies with the person's way of communicating and with the nature, length, complexity and context of the communication, and that the public entity \"shall give primary consideration to the requests of individuals with disabilities\".", "Requires aids to be provided in accessible formats, in a timely manner, and in a way that protects the privacy and independence of the person with a disability.", "Bars a public entity from requiring a person to bring someone to interpret, and requires video remote interpreting, where used, to include a clear, audible transmission of voices.", "Section 35.160(a)-(b) states the general effective-communication duty without choosing a venue listening technology or setting receiver counts or numerical listening-system performance limits. Section 35.160(d) separately sets quality and operating requirements for video remote interpreting." ], "limitations": "The general effective-communication provisions in section 35.160(a)-(b) do not specify a venue listening technology, receiver counts or numerical listening-system performance limits; the construction rules are in the 2010 ADA Standards. This does not describe the separate video remote interpreting requirements in paragraph (d). The date is that of the latest amendment in the section's source note (75 FR 56183, published 15 September 2010).", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "courts-and-chambers", "healthcare-settings", "lecture-halls", "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "doj-2010-maintenance-accessible-features", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2010-maintenance-accessible-features/", "title": "28 CFR 36.211: maintenance of accessible features (ADA Title III regulation)", "authors": "US Department of Justice", "publisher": "eCFR", "date": "2010-09-15", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-28/section-36.211", "summary": "The ADA Title III rule that public accommodations must keep the accessible features of their facilities and equipment in working order.", "findings": [ "Requires a public accommodation to maintain in operable working condition those features of facilities and equipment that the ADA or the Title III regulation requires to be readily accessible to and usable by people with disabilities.", "Does not prohibit isolated or temporary interruptions in service or access because of maintenance or repairs.", "Where the 2010 Standards require fewer accessible elements, or lower technical requirements, than the 1991 Standards did, allows a facility to reduce them to what the 2010 Standards require.", "The Title II regulation for state and local governments has the same three paragraphs (28 CFR 35.133)." ], "limitations": "A general duty that names no equipment: it does not mention assistive listening systems, receivers, batteries or neckloops, and sets no testing interval. The date is the latest amendment in the section's source note (75 FR 56251, 15 September 2010). The text was read through eCFR's official API.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "theatres-and-cinemas", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "doj-2010-ada-standards-guidance", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2010-ada-standards-guidance/", "title": "Guidance on the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design (section \"219 and 706 Assistive Listening Systems\")", "authors": "US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division", "publisher": "ada.gov", "date": "2010-09-15", "kind": "Regulatory guidance", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ada.gov/law-and-regs/design-standards/standards-guidance/", "summary": "The Department of Justice's explanation of how the 2010 ADA Standards changed the assistive listening rules from the 1991 Standards, and its answers to public comments.", "findings": [ "Explains that the 1991 Standards required receivers for at least 4% of fixed seats; the 2010 table keeps 4% for small facilities and lowers the percentage as facilities get larger.", "Describes the new rule that at least 25% of receivers, and no fewer than two, must be hearing-aid compatible, and says assembly areas served by an induction loop do not have to provide hearing-aid-compatible receivers.", "Notes that the 1991 Standards had no technical requirements for assistive listening systems, while section 706 adds standard mono jacks, neckloops for hearing-aid-compatible receivers, and limits on sound pressure level, signal-to-noise ratio and peak clipping; it states that currently available systems typically met these.", "Says a restaurant counts as an assembly area only if it presents programs to educate or entertain diners and provides audio amplification.", "Kept the exception that allows signs at ticket windows instead of at each assembly area, despite a comment that people who buy tickets online or by mail may never pass the window." ], "limitations": "Written in 2010, before Auracast existed; it does not mention Bluetooth. Explains the Standards but does not change them.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "loan-receivers", "signage-and-awareness", "theatres-and-cinemas", "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "doj-2010-ada-regulatory-impact-analysis", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2010-ada-regulatory-impact-analysis/", "title": "Final Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Final Revised Regulations Implementing Titles II and III of the ADA, Including Revised ADA Standards for Accessible Design", "authors": "HDR HLB Decision Economics Inc. (for the US Department of Justice)", "publisher": "US Department of Justice, Disability Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division (archived ADA website)", "date": "2010-07-23", "kind": "Regulatory impact analysis (final, for the 2010 ADA rules)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice; prepared under contract by the economics consultancy HDR HLB Decision Economics Inc.)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://archive.ada.gov/regs2010/RIA_2010regs/ria.htm", "summary": "The cost-benefit analysis behind the 2010 ADA rules, with its assumptions for the price, upkeep and replacement of hearing-aid-compatible receivers and the savings from requiring fewer receivers in large venues.", "findings": [ "Reports that advocacy groups and individuals with hearing loss said in comments that FM and infrared receivers typically cost $150 to $250 and neckloops no more than $50 each, and that loops work with hearing aids without extra receivers. After building a database of retail prices, the analysis lowered its incremental cost of making one receiver set-up hearing-aid compatible to $29.50 (low), $72 (medium) and $114.50 (high).", "Assumes incremental operation and maintenance for these receivers of 4% to 6% of their unit cost a year and replacement every 10 years, over a 40-year building life.", "Asked operators of assembly areas for their maintenance costs and replacement cycles. It states that the replies, from stadiums, arenas, convention centres and organisations with experience of lifecycle costs, were \"too general in nature\" to be used, so the earlier maintenance assumptions were kept.", "Puts the net present value of the requirement for hearing-aid-compatible receivers at minus $25.77 million (costs to facilities of $28.05 million against $2.28 million of benefits to users), at a 7% discount rate in its primary scenario.", "Puts the net present value of the revised receiver scoping, which requires fewer receivers in assembly areas over 500 seats and none where there is no audio amplification, at plus $273.95 million: $281.23 million saved by facilities against $7.29 million lost to users, in the same scenario.", "Appendix 3I identifies operation and maintenance percentages as incremental costs and gives requirement 62 (assistive listening, technical) low, middle and high values of 4%, 5% and 6%; Appendix 3L gives a ten-year replacement interval. Chapter 5, Assistive Listening Systems, Maintenance costs, explains why the agency retained these assumptions after receiving comments too general to use.", "Chapter 5, Updated Unit Costs (All Requirements), says general unit-cost estimates were raised by 3.6% from their 2007 estimates to 2009 dollars using the RSMeans construction cost index. The publication year 2010 is not a uniform price-base year for all figures or commenters' retail estimates.", "Chapter 6, Table 7, reports the national effects in millions of dollars under safe harbor, 50% readily achievable barrier removal, the 1991 Standards baseline and a 7% discount rate. Requirement 62 has net present value -25.77, user impact +2.28 and facility impact -28.05; requirement 66 has net present value +273.95, user impact -7.29 and facility impact +281.23. Parentheses denote negative values, and the published figures are rounded." ], "limitations": "A regulatory cost model, not measured costs: receiver prices come from a desk review of retail prices, and maintenance and replacement figures are assumptions. It models the receiver requirements only, not the cost of installing loop, FM or infrared systems. Monetary figures are US dollars; 2010 dates the analysis, while Chapter 5 identifies 2009 as the general unit-cost price base. The analysis is spread over several web pages and appendices of the Department's archived ADA site; the date is the one on its title page (23 July 2010).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs" ] }, { "id": "listen-2010-72-vs-216", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-2010-72-vs-216/", "title": "Should I Use 72 MHz or 216 MHz?", "authors": "Listen Team (Listen Technologies)", "publisher": "Listen Technologies (blog)", "date": "2010-02-24", "kind": "Manufacturer article", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, which sells the FM systems compared here as well as infrared, hearing loop, Wi-Fi and Auracast assistive listening products)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/should-i-use-72-mhz-or-216-mhz/", "summary": "A maker's comparison of the two US bands for its venue FM systems: range, channels, audio bandwidth, antennas, cable loss and interference.", "findings": [ "Gives, for its stationary transmitters with a dipole antenna, a range of 305 m (1,000 ft) at 72 MHz and up to 914 m (3,000 ft) line of sight at 216 MHz; with its portable transmitter both bands reach 45.7 m (150 ft).", "Says up to six channels can be used at once in a venue at 72 MHz but only three at 216 MHz, because the 72 MHz band is larger.", "Gives a frequency response of 50 Hz to 15 kHz at 72 MHz and 50 Hz to 10 kHz at 216 MHz (both within 3 dB), and says the difference is audible in high sounds such as cymbals or flute.", "Notes that 72 MHz needs a longer antenna (39 inches of clearance with its antenna kit, against 13 inches at 216 MHz), and that coaxial cable loses more signal at 216 MHz: 7-8 dB over 100 ft of RG-58, which it says can cut the range from 3,000 to 1,500 ft.", "States that FM signals travel through most walls, ceilings and floors.", "Says interference depends on the region and the amount of radio use nearby, that the usual cause is a nearby facility on the same channel, and advises scanning both bands with a receiver's seek function and surveying nearby venues before choosing.", "Says the company sells FM products on an 863 MHz carrier in Europe and a 150 MHz carrier in Australia.", "The Transmission Range section identifies the portable transmitter as LT-700. The Cable Length example identifies an LT-800-216 stationary transmitter with 100 ft of RG-58 cable and predicts a reduction from 3,000 to 1,500 ft." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's blog post about its own products (published 24 February 2010; last modified 4 June 2021 according to the page's metadata). Ranges and channel counts are the maker's figures, not independent measurements, and the post says range \"doubles\" at 216 MHz while its own figures triple it. It describes the US bands as 72-75 MHz allocated for ADA use; the FCC rule (47 CFR 15.237) sets three sub-bands between 72.0 and 76.0 MHz, and the FCC definitions also cover language translation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "rf-fm-bands" ] }, { "id": "rnid-2009-loop-checks", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-2009-loop-checks/", "title": "RNID calls for businesses to do better on induction loops", "authors": "Disability News Service", "publisher": "Disability News Service", "date": "2009-05-23", "kind": "News article (charity volunteers' reports)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (reports gathered by campaign volunteers of the UK charity RNID and released for its Deaf Awareness Week campaign; reported by Disability News Service; labelled advocacy rather than an independent test because the reports were gathered for a campaign, with no test protocol described in the news report)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/rnid-calls-for-businesses-to-do-better-on-induction-loops/", "summary": "A 2009 news report of RNID volunteers' checks on hearing loops in UK post offices, supermarkets, banks, shops and theatres.", "findings": [ "RNID campaign volunteers made about 500 reports in the first months of 2009 on 210 UK businesses, including post offices, supermarkets, banks, shops and theatres.", "In nearly half of the reports the loop was not working properly, and in nearly one in four there was no loop at all.", "Other complaints were that staff lacked training and that loops were not switched on.", "RNID used the findings to call on businesses to make sure their loops worked, citing the legal risk under the Disability Discrimination Act.", "The news article does not identify the volunteers' test equipment or procedure; it does not establish that they used no meter or protocol." ], "limitations": "Volunteer reports gathered for a campaign, with no sampling method, test protocol or measurements against IEC 60118-4 described in the news report, so the share of failing loops cannot be generalised. The data are from the UK in 2009 and reach the library only through a short news report.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "service-counters", "listener-preference", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "signage-and-awareness", "transport", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "hey-2009", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hey-2009/", "title": "Untersuchungen zum Einfluss des Mischungsverhältnisses der FM-Anlage auf das Sprachverständnis im Störschall bei CI-Patienten (Influence of an FM system's mixing ratio on speech understanding in noise in cochlear implant patients)", "authors": "Hey M, Anft D, Hocke T, Scholz G, Hessel H, Begall K", "publisher": "Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie 88(5):315-321 (Thieme; in German)", "date": "2009-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (first author at the ENT department of AMEOS Klinikum St. Salvator, Halberstadt; the co-authors' affiliations and any funding statement are in the German full text, which could not be read; the implants were Cochlear's and the FM system Phonak's)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0028-1100382", "summary": "Measured how the balance between FM and microphone input changes speech understanding in noise for adult cochlear implant users, when the talker wears the FM transmitter and when another talker does not.", "findings": [ "Seventeen postlingually deafened adults with Cochlear Freedom implant systems used a Phonak MicroLink FM receiver with a Campus transmitter, and eight normal-hearing adults served as controls. Speech reception thresholds were measured in noise with the adaptive Oldenburg sentence test, in a set-up simulating a classroom.", "Without FM, the median threshold was 1.6 dB for the implant users and -13 dB for the normal-hearing listeners.", "When the talker wore the FM transmitter (\"teacher is talking\"), understanding improved as the FM share of the mix rose; at a 3:1 ratio of FM to microphone, the threshold was 15 dB better than without FM.", "When another talker without the transmitter spoke (\"pupil is talking\"), understanding stayed nearly the same at every mixing ratio, with no statistically significant difference from listening without FM.", "The authors found no single FM setting that was best for both situations and suggest different settings for different listening conditions." ], "limitations": "Read from the English abstract only; the German full text could not be read. Published online on 22 December 2008, in the May 2009 issue. Personal FM in a simulated classroom with one maker's implants of 2008: evidence about the input path and the mix, not a venue system.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "dot-2009-airport-information", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dot-2009-airport-information/", "title": "14 CFR 382.53: What information must carriers give individuals with a vision or hearing impairment at airports? (Air Carrier Access Act regulation)", "authors": "US Department of Transportation", "publisher": "eCFR", "date": "2009-03-18", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Transportation)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/section-382.53", "summary": "The US air travel rule that requires airlines to give passengers who identify themselves as needing hearing or visual assistance prompt access to the information given to other passengers at gates, ticketing areas and customer service desks.", "findings": [ "US carriers must ensure that passengers who identify themselves as persons needing visual or hearing assistance have \"prompt access to the same information provided to other passengers at each gate, ticketing area, and customer service desk\" they own, lease or control at any US or foreign airport; foreign carriers must do so at US airports and, abroad, for flights to or from the US.", "Where the airport has effective control over the gates, ticketing areas and customer service desks, the carrier and the airport are jointly responsible.", "The information covered includes flight safety, ticketing, check-in, delays or cancellations, schedule changes, boarding, connections, gate assignments, checking baggage, offers on oversold flights, paging, aircraft changes that affect passengers with disabilities, and emergencies; baggage claim information must reach these passengers no later than others.", "Names no method or technology: it does not mention hearing loops, assistive listening systems, captions or visual displays." ], "limitations": "Applies only to passengers who identify themselves, and to the carrier's own areas; it sets an outcome, not a technology. Read from the eCFR text current on 9 October 2026; the section was issued on 13 May 2008 (73 FR 27665) and amended on 18 March 2009 (74 FR 11471), and the date given is the latest amendment shown.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "sia-500-2009", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sia-500-2009/", "title": "SIA 500:2009 Hindernisfreie Bauten", "authors": "SIA (Swiss Society of Engineers and Architects)", "publisher": "SIA", "date": "2009-01-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "National standard (public preview)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (SIA)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://shop.sia.ch/9ffe2922-345f-404f-ba13-63f917ddcc4d/D/DownloadAnhang", "summary": "The Swiss building accessibility standard includes hearing systems and distinguishes technical design from the laws that determine where it applies.", "findings": [ "The preview states approval on 4 September 2008 and validity from 1 January 2009, replacing SN 521500:1988. Its printing history gives January 2009 for the first printing.", "The contents identify section 7.8 on hearing systems and Annex F on their characteristics.", "The foreword says federal, cantonal and municipal laws determine where accessible building is required, while this standard defines how to design it.", "The preview is from the September 2022 third printing, incorporating corrections C3 and C4; it also lists a June 2011 reprint incorporating C1 and C2." ], "limitations": "Only the publisher preview was read. Sections 7.8 and Annex F are listed but their requirements are absent. No hearing-system change is inferred from the correction or printing dates. The record date is the explicitly stated validity date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "aph-2008-parliament-loop-audit", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/aph-2008-parliament-loop-audit/", "title": "Audio Frequency Induction Loops Audit in Parliament House, for the Purpose of OH&S Compliance (version 0.1)", "authors": "Ciolek M, Covington J (Broadcasting Infrastructure and Support, Department of Parliamentary Services)", "publisher": "Parliament of Australia, Department of Parliamentary Services (published with the Senate Finance and Public Administration committee's 2011-12 Budget Estimates documents for the parliamentary departments)", "date": "2008-12-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Field audit (measured, one government building)", "type": "Field and bench tests", "funding": "Government (an in-house audit by the Australian Parliament's Department of Parliamentary Services of the hearing loops it maintains in Parliament House, carried out by its own broadcasting support staff)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://aph.gov.au/~/media/Estimates/Live/fapa_ctte/estimates/bud_1112/parliamentary/p21d.ashx", "summary": "A measured audit of the 31 hearing loop areas in Australia's Parliament House against the Australian loop standard of the time, graded by how much of each area received a usable signal.", "findings": [ "Covered every loop the department maintained in Parliament House: committee rooms, the House of Representatives floor and galleries, the Senate galleries, a theatre, party rooms and the Cabinet room, 31 areas in all. It set out to check them against AS 60118.4 (2007), which it lists as equivalent to IEC 60118-4 (2006).", "Method: each loop amplifier was first checked and set up to its maker's recommendations; a calibrated loop monitor then read the signal level on a grid across the room and, with the amplifier off, the magnetic background noise. The target was a signal of 0 dB peak (down to -6 dB) and a signal-to-noise ratio of 45 dB, with 25 dB the minimum.", "Graded each area by the share of it reaching a suitable level: 80-100% (the top grade), 20-80% (\"walkabout to find a good reception spot!!\"), under 20%, or a low base level with excessive attenuation (the lowest grade). Table 1 assigns nine areas to the top grade, three to the second, three to the third and 16 to the lowest; the Cabinet Room's top classification has the partial-test qualification in Appendix A31.", "Its room maps show the pattern behind the grades: in the main committee room, readings near the walls were about 0 to -6 dB and fell to about -24 to -30 dB in the middle of the room.", "Concluded that the loop layouts used had resulted in poor performance and that about 20% coverage was achievable in most venues but not in critical areas such as witness seats. It recommended redesigned loops, newer amplifiers, equalisers to compensate for metal loss, and that any rework be supervised and commissioned by a broadcast officer experienced with loops.", "Notes that Australian rules then required at least 20% of public meeting places over 120 m² to have a loop meeting the standard, and that authorities were considering up to 100% coverage.", "Found above-normal hum in one room from television studio lamps and their mains wiring.", "Describes metal in modern buildings (reinforcement, cable trays, plumbing and air-conditioning) as absorbing the signal unpredictably, weakening some areas and parts of the frequency range, and says metal loss compensation can give very good results in some cases.", "Table 1, printed pp. 10-11, assigns 80-100% to A5: Committee room 1R3; A8: Committee room 2R2; A14: Committee room 2S2; A16: House of Representatives floor; A17: House of Representatives gallery, second west; A21: Senate gallery, second east; A24: Senate gallery, first east; A28: EPCR Blue Room; A31: Cabinet room.", "Table 1, printed pp. 10-11, assigns 20-80% to A2: Committee room 1R0 gallery; A22: Senate gallery, second north; A27: Theatre.", "Table 1, printed pp. 10-11, assigns under 20% to A6: Committee room 1R4; A7: Committee room 2R1; A10: Committee room 1S2.", "Table 1, printed pp. 10-11, assigns low base level and excessive attenuation, without a percentage to A1: Main committee room 1R0; A3: Committee room 1R1; A4: Committee room 1R2; A9: Committee room 2R3; A11: Committee room 1S3; A12: Committee room 1S4; A13: Committee room 2S1; A15: Committee room 2S3; A18: House of Representatives gallery, first west; A19: House of Representatives gallery, first north; A20: House of Representatives gallery, first south; A23: Senate gallery, second south; A25: Senate gallery, first north; A26: Senate gallery, first south; A29: Government party room; A30: Opposition party room.", "Appendix A31, printed p. 42, qualifies the Cabinet room result: system integrity issues restricted testing to a partial check using low-level pink noise. The report also refers to earlier commissioning by T4. Its top grade in Table 1 is therefore not evidence of a complete coverage measurement in this audit.", "Table 1 row A27 ties the theatre assessment to the indicated labelling. Appendix A28, printed p. 39, reports above-normal hum in the EPCR Blue Room from television studio lamps and mains wiring, with a sharp rise in the northeast corner.", "The report gives December 2008 on its cover and 17 November 2008 in its publication history, but does not state when the room measurements were made. Section 3.1 identifies the LM Audio ILM12 induction loop monitor." ], "limitations": "One building, reported in 2008 against the Australian standard of the time by the department's own staff, although the report calls itself an independent evaluation. Measurement dates are not stated. The grades are the audit's own coverage criteria: the stated procedure covers signal level and background noise but not frequency response, so it is not a full test against IEC 60118-4. Amplifiers were adjusted before measuring, so the results generally describe the loops after set-up rather than as found; Appendix A31 records only partial testing of the Cabinet Room. It does not systematically record installer qualifications or compare training routes, and cannot isolate their effects from design and upkeep. Background noise was read with a C-weighted meter (Appendix C1, printed page 44). The document is a first draft (version 0.1); its cover gives December 2008 and its history 17 November 2008, and it was published with the 2011-12 Budget Estimates documents.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "courts-and-chambers", "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "wolfe-schafer-2008", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/wolfe-schafer-2008/", "title": "Optimizing the benefit of sound processors coupled to personal FM systems", "authors": "Wolfe J, Schafer EC", "publisher": "Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 19(8):585-594", "date": "2008-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (repeated measures, small sample)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (first author at the Hearts for Hearing Foundation, Oklahoma City; PubMed tags the study as having non-US-government research support without naming it; the full text, with any funding statement, could not be read; the processors tested were Advanced Bionics')", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.19.8.2", "summary": "Compared two settings for mixing a personal FM receiver's signal with the cochlear implant processor's microphone, 50/50 and 30/70, for adults with Advanced Bionics processors.", "findings": [ "Twelve adults using Advanced Bionics Auria processors were tested in quiet (35 and 50 dB HL) and in noise (+5 dB SNR), with and without a personal FM system, at two audio-mixing ratios, and answered questionnaires after two weeks with each ratio.", "At 50/50 the processor microphone and the FM signal are weighted equally; at 30/70 the microphone signal is attenuated by 10 dB.", "The FM system significantly improved speech recognition in quiet at low presentation levels and in noise, and perceived benefit in noise.", "With 30/70, recognition of soft speech not directed to the FM transmitter was significantly poorer. Speech recognition in noise and functional benefit did not differ between the two ratios.", "The authors recommend a 50/50 mixing ratio for FM use in quiet and noisy situations." ], "limitations": "Read from the abstract only; the full text could not be read. Personal FM with one maker's processors of 2008, tested in a clinic: evidence about the input path and the mix, not a venue system. Twelve participants.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "iso-2008-3382-2", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iso-2008-3382-2/", "title": "ISO 3382-2:2008: Acoustics – Measurement of room acoustic parameters – Part 2: Reverberation time in ordinary rooms", "authors": "International Organization for Standardization", "publisher": "ISO", "date": "2008-06-12", "kind": "Measurement standard (publisher abstract)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ISO/TC 43/SC 2)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://committee.iso.org/standard/36201.html?browse=ics", "summary": "ISO’s abstract describes a method for measuring room reverberation and reporting the result.", "findings": [ "Covers measurement procedures, apparatus, number of measurement positions, evaluation and reporting for reverberation time in ordinary rooms.", "The abstract says results can be compared with room reverberation requirements. It does not supply a universal acceptable reverberation time for listeners with hearing loss." ], "limitations": "Publisher abstract and catalogue metadata only; the paid standard and its 2009 corrigendum were not read. The catalogue lifecycle gives publication on 12 June 2008 and confirmation in 2022.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "bsi-2008-en-54-16", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bsi-2008-en-54-16/", "title": "BS EN 54-16:2008: Fire detection and fire alarm systems — Part 16: Voice alarm control and indicating equipment", "authors": "European Committee for Standardization (CEN/TC 72)", "publisher": "British Standards Institution", "date": "2008-03-31", "kind": "Standard (public preview)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (CEN standard published by the British Standards Institution)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/fire-detection-and-fire-alarm-systems-voice-alarm-control-and-indicating-equipment", "summary": "A public preview explains the role and assessment boundary of voice alarm control and indicating equipment in fire alarm systems.", "findings": [ "The introduction, printed page 6, says voice alarm control and indicating equipment controls fire alarm signals and voice messages and may be separate from, or combined with, fire alarm control equipment.", "The introduction says components of the voice alarm control equipment are tested as part of the whole equipment, rather than as separate parts under this standard. It distinguishes mandatory functions from optional functions with associated requirements.", "The foreword identifies EN 54-4 as the part on power supply equipment and EN 54-24 as the part on voice alarm loudspeakers.", "The contents lists a fault warning condition, integrity of transmission paths, audio performance, software monitoring and environmental tests. Redundant power amplifiers are listed as an option with requirements." ], "limitations": "The publisher page and eight-page preview were read, ending at the introduction. Detailed requirements and test clauses are outside the preview. The preview does not establish that a connected hearing loop or wireless listening system has been assessed as part of a voice alarm installation. BSI lists this edition as current and under review at access.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "schafer-2007", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/schafer-2007/", "title": "Electroacoustic evaluation of frequency-modulated receivers interfaced with personal hearing aids", "authors": "Schafer EC, Thibodeau LM, Whalen HS, Overson GJ", "publisher": "Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 38(4):315-326 (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association)", "date": "2007-10-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (electroacoustic bench measurements)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (first author at the Speech and Hearing Sciences Department, University of North Texas; the PubMed record names no funder, and the full text, which may state one, was not read)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pubs.asha.org/doi/10.1044/0161-1461(2007/034)", "summary": "A bench comparison of personal FM receivers coupled to hearing aids through a neckloop, an ear-level receiver and a programmable ear-level receiver, measured by the ASHA FM-advantage method.", "findings": [ "Measured the electroacoustic output of hearing aids coupled to three kinds of FM receiver: a body-worn receiver with a neckloop, an ear-level receiver that could not be programmed, and a programmable ear-level receiver, following the FM-advantage approach in ASHA's 2002 guidelines.", "Compared the hearing aid alone with the FM system at typical input levels with a complex signal, and at high input levels with a pure tone to check maximum output.", "Reports that the receivers with neckloops showed significant low-frequency reduction and the most variable performance of the three types; the ear-level receivers varied less, and the programmable ones gave the most flexibility.", "The authors link the variability to the type of system and the compression characteristics of the devices, and conclude that the great variability in all systems supports electroacoustic evaluation of each fitting." ], "limitations": "Read from the PubMed abstract only; the publisher's page refused access, so the number of devices, the neckloop models and the size of the low-frequency reduction could not be checked. Personal FM systems for school use, not venue receivers, measured with hearing aids of 2007.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "harkins-tucker-2007", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/harkins-tucker-2007/", "title": "An Internet Survey of Individuals With Hearing Loss Regarding Assistive Listening Devices", "authors": "Harkins J, Tucker P", "publisher": "Trends in Amplification 11(2):91-100 (SAGE)", "date": "2007-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (online survey)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Technology Access Program, Gallaudet University, for the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Hearing Enhancement; developed under grant H133E-03006-06 from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, US Department of Education)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4111414/", "summary": "A 2005 online survey of 423 hearing aid and cochlear implant users, recruited mainly through HLAA, on their use of assistive listening devices, problems with receivers borrowed at venues, and where they get information.", "findings": [ "Results, Suggestions and Problems, immediately before Table 4, calls the 276 public-venue borrowers 83% of recent device users. The opening Results paragraph gives 423 completed responses and 67 people reporting no device use in the previous two years, implying 356 recent users; it does not explain the different base implied by 83%. The borrower count is usable without reconstructing that percentage. Methods gives a two-year recall interval for other device-use questions, but does not separately state one for the public-venue borrowing item.", "Table 4 gives the remaining often/very often versus at-least-sometimes pairs among 276 venue borrowers: poor sound 51%/67%, incompatibility 47%/77%, interference 44%/78%, dead batteries 34%/70%, difficulty controlling own voice 27%/55%, and difficulty with receiver controls 12%/35%.", "Results, Listening Situations and Assistive Listening Device Use, reports that 58% had used assistance in the previous two years as an audience member with the speaker more than 10 feet away. The Discussion reports better speech understanding for 89% of users in that situation; Figure 2 identifies the audience-benefit subgroup as 274. This compares assistance with hearing aids or implants alone, not one transmission technology with another.", "In Suggestions and Problems, immediately after Table 4, 76% were willing to purchase a hypothetical universal personal receiver, 5% were unwilling and 19% were unsure; no item count is printed there. Methods describes recruitment through the HLAA convention, its newsletter and chapters, and the Beyond Hearing listserver, with the survey online July-September 2005.", "Of 276 respondents who had borrowed a receiver at a public venue, 65% often or very often found no signs showing where to check one out (85% at least sometimes), and 67% often or very often found staff not trained to operate the equipment (85% at least sometimes); these were the two most frequent problems.", "Other problems met at least sometimes were interference or buzzing (78%), a receiver that would not work with the respondent's hearing aid or implant (77%), dead batteries (70%) and poor sound quality (67%).", "85% had telecoils, and the telecoil or a room loop was the most used way of connecting to assistive listening in the previous two years (65%), followed by neckloops (48%).", "The most used sources of information on hearing technology were consumer organisations (73%), meetings and conferences (68%) and word of mouth (67%). Audiologists were the most cited professional source (59%); 12% named professional associations.", "The authors note that other surveys show a gap between audiologists' claims to have informed clients about assistive listening devices and clients' belief that they were informed.", "22% of respondents used cochlear implants on one or both ears; results are not separated by device." ], "limitations": "A self-selected online sample recruited mainly through HLAA and online hearing-loss groups, mostly with severe or profound loss and long experience of hearing technology, which the authors say cannot be generalised. Data from July to September 2005, before Auracast and Wi-Fi streaming; the survey did not record which venue technology respondents had borrowed.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness", "cochlear-implants", "neckloops", "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "ebu-2007-r37", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ebu-2007-r37/", "title": "The relative timing of the sound and vision components of a television signal (EBU Recommendation R37-2007)", "authors": "European Broadcasting Union (EBU)", "publisher": "European Broadcasting Union, Geneva", "date": "2007-02-27", "kind": "International recommendation (television broadcasting)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (European Broadcasting Union, an association of public service media organisations; an EBU technical recommendation)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://tech.ebu.ch/publications/r037", "summary": "The European broadcasters' one-page recommendation on how far television sound may run ahead of or behind the picture.", "findings": [ "Sets the overall, end-to-end limits at any output intended for transmission: sound no more than 40 ms before the picture and no more than 60 ms after it.", "Asks that each stage of the production chain stay within 5 ms early to 15 ms late.", "States that the limits rest on subjective tests of the offsets at which a failure of synchronism between lip movements and speech becomes perceptible to 50% of observers, and that the just-perceptible offset depends on the programme and the viewing distance." ], "limitations": "Written for broadcasters' production and transmission chains and for general audiences, not for listeners with hearing loss or for the extra delay a venue's assistive listening system adds after the television. The subjective tests behind the limits are not described. First issued in 1986 and revised several times; the EBU's publications page lists this 2007 issue, dated 27 February 2007.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "access-board-2006-courthouses", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/access-board-2006-courthouses/", "title": "Justice for All: Designing Accessible Courthouses (recommendations from the Courthouse Access Advisory Committee)", "authors": "Courthouse Access Advisory Committee", "publisher": "US Access Board", "date": "2006-11-15", "kind": "Advisory committee guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (US Access Board federal advisory committee of 35 members, among them the Hearing Loss Association of America, courts, architects, code bodies and disability groups)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.access-board.gov/ada/additional-resources/designing-accessible-courthouses.html", "summary": "A federal advisory committee's best-practice recommendations for accessible courthouses, including which assistive listening technology suits courtrooms, jury rooms and jury assembly areas.", "findings": [ "Recommends infrared as the preferred assistive listening system for courtrooms because privacy matters; portable systems may serve some areas, but the courtroom itself needs a permanent system.", "Lists FM as usable indoors or outdoors, covering up to several hundred feet and highly portable, but says its signal passes through walls, so it may be used in the jury orientation room but not the jury deliberation room.", "Lists infrared as usable in the courtroom and jury deliberation room, with receivers compatible with most infrared systems, but notes that many infrared systems work only indoors and that obstacles between emitter and receiver interrupt the signal.", "States that FM, infrared and induction loop systems give the same amount of understanding when they are of good quality, so the choice depends on other factors such as confidentiality.", "Calls a permanently installed induction loop an inexpensive option for jury assembly areas, and lists loop drawbacks: receivers for people without telecoils, possible spill into adjacent rooms from large loops, and susceptibility to electrical interference.", "Recommends that systems serve the whole courtroom, including the jury box, bench, counsel tables and jury deliberation rooms, and names failure to maintain equipment and missing signs among common errors.", "Notes that all the systems it discusses require the person who is speaking to use a microphone, and that the system is required to serve the gallery.", "Says jury deliberation rooms usually have no amplification, so a permanent system is not required there, but access should be provided for a juror with hearing loss; a small loop with signs helps at security and information counters even without glazing.", "Its best practice says assistive listening systems should serve all areas of the courtroom, including the jury box, jury deliberation rooms, judge's bench and staff areas, counsel tables and conference rooms, and it lists use in the jury orientation room, courtroom and jury deliberation room among infrared's advantages.", "Its introduction to assistive listening systems states: \"All of them require that the person who is speaking use a microphone.\"" ], "limitations": "Best-practice recommendations, not a regulation (the report says so), written in 2006 before Auracast and Wi-Fi streaming. Its statement that the technologies give equal understanding cites no study. Date from the report's cover (PDF version); the web page itself shows no date.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-preference", "loop-limits", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "courts-and-chambers" ] }, { "id": "iec-60118-4-2006", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-60118-4-2006/", "title": "IEC 60118-4:2006 Electroacoustics - Hearing aids - Part 4: Induction loop systems for hearing aid purposes - Magnetic field strength", "authors": "IEC TC 29", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "2006-10-27", "kind": "International standard (public catalogue)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/13427", "summary": "The second edition of the hearing-loop system standard, covering field strength, frequency response and measurement.", "findings": [ "The catalogue dates edition 2.0 to 27 October 2006 and records its withdrawal on 11 December 2014.", "The abstract describes magnetic field-strength requirements for sufficient signal relative to noise without hearing-aid overload, minimum frequency response for intelligibility, measurement methods and information for operators and users." ], "limitations": "Public abstract and edition metadata only. The paid standard and its detailed differences from the first edition were not read.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "etymotic-2006-multi-coil-patent", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etymotic-2006-multi-coil-patent/", "title": "Multi-coil coupling system for hearing aid applications (US 7,099,486 B2)", "authors": "Julstrom SD, Drambarean V, Soede W", "publisher": "United States Patent and Trademark Office", "date": "2006-08-29", "kind": "Manufacturer patent (granted US patent)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Etymotic Research, a hearing-technology maker, was the original assignee; the patent is now assigned to III Holdings 7 LLC)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/7099486", "summary": "A hearing-technology maker's patent on a coupler with several inductors for hearing aid telecoils, whose background describes the limits of neck loops and silhouette inductors.", "findings": [ "States in its background that neck loop and silhouette couplers have had difficulty giving the telecoil a field \"of sufficient strength and sufficient uniformity\" for typical positions, so that coupling is predictable, loud enough and able to overcome environmental magnetic noise.", "States that silhouette couplers, designed with behind-the-ear aids in mind, have not reached sufficient field strength at the greater distance to in-the-ear telecoils, or given the right field orientation for best coupling.", "Gives typical office magnetic noise as in the 5 mA/m range and a cellular phone as about 30 mA/m at three feet, as examples of interference that telecoil pickup must overcome.", "Proposes separate inductors shaped for in-the-ear and behind-the-ear aids, with signal conditioning, to give a stronger and more uniform field." ], "limitations": "Background text in a patent, written to motivate the applicant's own design: it gives no measurements of particular neck loops or silhouettes. Priority date 7 January 2000, filed 31 January 2003, granted 29 August 2006. The text was read through Google Patents; the link given is the USPTO's copy.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "massachusetts-aab-2006-houses-of-worship", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/massachusetts-aab-2006-houses-of-worship/", "title": "521 CMR 16.00: Houses of Worship (Architectural Access Board regulations, 2006 edition)", "authors": "Massachusetts Architectural Access Board", "publisher": "Commonwealth of Massachusetts (mass.gov)", "date": "2006-01-27", "kind": "Regulation (state accessibility regulation)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (Massachusetts Architectural Access Board, part of the state's Division of Occupational Licensure)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.mass.gov/doc/521-cmr-1600-houses-of-worship-2006-pdf/download", "summary": "The Massachusetts accessibility regulation written specifically for houses of worship, including when they need an assistive listening system, how many receivers, and which areas it should serve.", "findings": [ "Houses of worship must comply with 521 CMR except where section 16.00 modifies it; they include \"churches, chapels, temples, synagogues and mosques\", and the spaces that must be accessible include areas open to the congregation, administrative offices, and religious meeting halls and classrooms. Day care centres in houses of worship follow the rules for educational facilities.", "Where audible communication is integral to the use of a space, an assembly area must have a permanently installed assistive listening system if it accommodates at least 50 people, has an audio-amplification system and has fixed seating (16.5.1).", "Other assembly areas need a permanent system, or a portable system with enough outlets or wiring to support it, and the minimum number of receivers is 4% of the total number of seats, never fewer than two (16.5.2). Section 16.00 sets no hearing-aid-compatible share.", "If the system serves individual fixed seats, they must be within 50 feet (15 m) of the speaker's podium with a complete view of it, and the system \"should serve all participants whether seated in balconies, among the general audience or upon the altar and the podium areas\" (16.5.3).", "Requires signs telling patrons that a listening system is available, under the state's signage rules (16.5.4); names no transmission technology.", "The Board's regulations page says 521 CMR applies to all buildings and facilities in Massachusetts open to members of the public, naming places of worship among them, and lists the 2006 edition as the current edition." ], "limitations": "Only section 16.00 was read; other parts of 521 CMR that it refers to (such as signage) and any performance requirements elsewhere were not checked. The regulation predates Auracast and current Wi-Fi systems. The date is the page date printed on the 2006 edition (27 January 2006). Mass.gov refused automated downloads, so the PDF was read in a browser.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "aaa-2006-adult-hearing-aids", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/aaa-2006-adult-hearing-aids/", "title": "Guidelines for the Audiologic Management of Adult Hearing Impairment", "authors": "American Academy of Audiology Task Force (Valente M, chair; Abrams H, Benson D, Chisolm T, Citron D, Hampton D, Loavenbruck A, Ricketts T, Solodar H, Sweetow R)", "publisher": "American Academy of Audiology (Audiology Today 18(5))", "date": "2006-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Professional guidance (clinical practice guideline)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (American Academy of Audiology, the professional association of audiologists; prepared by a task force chaired by Michael Valente)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/haguidelines.pdf_53994876e92e42.70908344.pdf", "summary": "The Academy's guideline on hearing aid selection, fitting, verification and validation for adults, including its recommendations on telecoils.", "findings": [ "Recommends considering telecoil circuitry where appropriate, saying telecoil use may suit many patients because it helps with hearing assistance technology as well as with the telephone (evidence level 4, grade C).", "Lists the telecoil among features to confirm before the fitting, by a listening check where standard electroacoustic methods cannot verify it.", "Recommends verifying special features for each patient, noting that the desired telecoil orientation depends on use (room loop or telephone), and that \"the telecoil output should be verified given the presentation angle of the desired signal\"; in-situ measurement simulating the desired condition may be needed for the most accurate result (evidence level 4, grade C)." ], "limitations": "Graded on low-level evidence for telecoils, and gives no procedure or target for the telecoil response. The PDF read shows no date; the year and issue come from ASHA's evidence map entry, and the file was created in June 2006. It does not cover cochlear implants.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "doj-2005-hotel-communication", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-2005-hotel-communication/", "title": "ADA Business Brief: Communicating with Guests who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing in Hotels, Motels, and Other Places of Transient Lodging", "authors": "US Department of Justice", "publisher": "US Department of Justice (ADA.gov)", "date": "2005-08-11", "kind": "Government guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ada.gov/resources/business-brief-hotels/", "summary": "Hotel communication guidance describing individual communication needs and portable guest-room kits.", "findings": [ "The appropriate communication method depends on the guest and the nature and complexity of the exchange; assistive listening devices are among the methods mentioned.", "The portable kits described contain text telephones, visual alarms and visual notification devices. The brief does not describe these as systems carrying meeting-room audio." ], "limitations": "Originally issued in October 2003; date is the displayed update. Predates the 2010 Standards. Used here only to distinguish guest-room communication equipment from assembly-area assistive listening, not to determine current guest-room design requirements.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "karg-2005-quality-controlled-loops", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/karg-2005-quality-controlled-loops/", "title": "Only quality controlled loops are fit for the future: the new international standard IEC 60118-4 for Audio-Frequency Induction Loop Systems", "authors": "Karg S", "publisher": "European Federation of Hard of Hearing People (text of a talk at the 20th International Congress on the Education of the Deaf, Maastricht)", "date": "2005-07-18", "kind": "Advocacy presentation (text of a conference talk)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Siegfried Karg, then vice president of the European Federation of Hard of Hearing People and president of Pro Audito Winterthur, a Swiss hearing-loss association; the text is hosted on EFHOH's website)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://efhoh.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Maastricht-Hearing-Loops-Presentation.pdf", "summary": "A hearing-loss advocate's 2005 talk on why loops should be measured against IEC 60118-4, with the speaker's own estimate of how many installed loops fall short.", "findings": [ "PDF page 2, commentary on slides 8 and 11, names the Casino Theater in Winterthur, Switzerland, renovated in 2002, and describes its frequency-response graph as within ±3 dB from 100 Hz to 5000 Hz. The commentary supplies no measurement date, operator or instrument, and the actual slide graph is absent from this document. The renovation date is not an established measurement date.", "Lists the four measurements required under the edition then in force, IEC 60118-4:1998: average field strength, maximum field strength, frequency response and magnetic background noise.", "States: \"I would guess that 90% of installed induction loops do not meet this standard\", and that the speaker imagines most existing loops have a poor frequency response. No measurements are given for either statement.", "Shows the loop in a renovated Swiss theatre, with a frequency response within ±3 dB from 100 Hz to 5 kHz, as an example that meets the standard.", "Reports that a Swiss law in force from 1 January 2004 required assistive listening in new and renovated public buildings and let the national hard of hearing association object to plans, and that the association was \"training and certifying professionals\" to measure loops to the IEC standard." ], "limitations": "Presentation commentary describing one theatre's frequency-response result, without its graph or raw readings. The separate 90% figure is the speaker's own guess, not a measured survey. Written in 2005 about the 1998 edition, before the 2006 and 2014 editions. The legal points concern Switzerland only.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "rnid-2004-arts-venues", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/rnid-2004-arts-venues/", "title": "Deaf people failed by UK arts attractions", "authors": "Health Club Management (reporting an RNID survey)", "publisher": "Health Club Management (Leisure Media)", "date": "2004-11-30", "kind": "News article (charity mystery-shopping survey)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (survey by profoundly deaf mystery shoppers on behalf of the UK charity RNID, then the Royal National Institute for the Deaf, for its Access to Arts campaign; reported by a leisure trade magazine)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.healthclubmanagement.co.uk/health-club-management-news/Deaf-people-failed-by-UK-arts-attractions/9767", "summary": "A 2004 trade-press report of RNID mystery shoppers' visits to 75 UK arts venues, covering loops, textphones, published access information and staff deaf awareness.", "findings": [ "Profoundly deaf mystery shoppers visited 75 arts venues in nine UK cities in August and September 2004 for RNID; seven were found to be deaf aware.", "50% had not fitted an induction loop; of the 39% that had, \"many failed to publicise it\".", "80% had no textphone service for bookings or advance information, and 65% lacked published information on how disabled people, including deaf and hard of hearing people, could get access.", "Three London venues were singled out for excellence, all with deaf-aware staff.", "RNID called for deaf awareness training for all arts venue staff, access equipment that is well displayed with staff trained to use it, and an access guide in every venue giving precise details of what it provides." ], "limitations": "A short news report: no method, protocol or venue list is given, \"many\" is not quantified, and the loop figures (50% and 39%) leave 11% unaccounted for. UK arts venues in 2004, surveyed just before the Disability Discrimination Act deadline of 1 October 2004 for service providers.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "emsd-2003-infrared-interference", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/emsd-2003-infrared-interference/", "title": "Interference Problems of Fluorescent Lamps Operating on High Frequency Electronic Ballasts with Infrared Remote Control Equipment and Infrared Simultaneous Interpretation System", "authors": "Wu M (Martin Wu Kwok-tin)", "publisher": "Energy Efficiency Office, Electrical and Mechanical Services Department, Hong Kong SAR Government", "date": "2003-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Technical guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Electrical and Mechanical Services Department, Hong Kong SAR Government; written by a department engineer)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.emsd.gov.hk/filemanager/en/content_764/infrared_interference_emsdweb.pdf", "summary": "A Hong Kong government engineer's paper on how sunlight, incandescent lamps and fluorescent lamps on high-frequency electronic ballasts interfere with infrared remote controls and infrared interpretation systems, and how to avoid it.", "findings": [ "Reproduces an IEC subcarrier allocation for infrared consumer products: remote controls up to 40 kHz, conference systems 40 kHz-1 MHz, high-speed remote control and data 1-2 MHz, high-fidelity audio 2-6 MHz and analogue video 6-30 MHz.", "Explains that direct sunlight on an infrared receiver saturates its photodetector and generates considerable noise, so venues with large windows need screening or additional radiators.", "Says tungsten and halogen lamps, dimmed or not, emit enough infrared to add considerable noise, may need extra radiators, and should not be used in conference rooms with infrared interpretation systems.", "Reports that fluorescent lamps on fixed electronic ballasts at about 40 kHz can interfere up to about 280 kHz (the 7th harmonic), and on dimmable ballasts running at 40-100 kHz up to about 400 kHz, so analogue systems on low subcarriers need precautions and, where information is lacking, a site test.", "Describes infrared's inability to pass opaque structures such as walls and doors as giving privacy and no cross-talk between rooms, with typical systems carrying up to 16 channels.", "Recommends digital infrared systems in the 3-6 MHz band, within the IEC's high-fidelity audio range, to avoid ballast interference, and early collaboration and a joint site test by the lighting and interpretation engineers." ], "limitations": "Written in 2003 for simultaneous interpretation systems in Hong Kong conference rooms (40 kHz-1 MHz subcarriers), not for assistive listening receivers, and before LED lighting was common. It reports no measurements of its own and names one maker's digital system as an example.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "infrared-limits" ] }, { "id": "bradley-2003", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bradley-2003/", "title": "On the importance of early reflections for speech in rooms", "authors": "Bradley JS, Sato H, Picard M", "publisher": "Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 113(6):3233-3244", "date": "2003-06-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (National Research Council Canada; Université de Montréal)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/accepted/?id=dd3c1e7a-8d8d-440e-bbcd-04c69ef20419", "summary": "Speech intelligibility tests in simulated sound fields and analysis of measured room responses on the role of early reflections.", "findings": [ "Adding early reflections, arriving within 50 ms of the direct sound, increased the effective signal-to-noise ratio and intelligibility scores as much as an equal increase in direct-sound energy.", "The benefit held both for younger listeners with near-normal hearing and for older listeners with mild to moderate high-frequency hearing loss; none of the 21 listeners in the initial tests used hearing aids.", "In measured rooms for speech, early reflections raised the effective signal-to-noise ratio by up to 9 dB, most at seats far from the talker.", "Section II.B.2 divides the 21 participants in the initial tests into 11 with near-normal hearing and 10 with greater hearing loss; the latter needed approximately 5 dB higher SNR for similar intelligibility in this experiment. This is a group result, not a universal target. Separate study funding is not stated in the archived manuscript.", "Section II.B.3 uses a partly different sample of 16 listeners (10 with near-normal hearing and six with greater hearing loss) for the tests with added late reverberation. The initial 21-person sample is not a total for every experiment in the paper." ], "limitations": "Simulated sound fields in an anechoic room; reflections of a single source, not two separate systems carrying the same programme; no listeners with severe hearing loss, which the authors say still needs testing.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "delay", "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "iec-61603-7-2003", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-61603-7-2003/", "title": "IEC 61603-7:2003 Transmission systems of audio and/or video and related signals using infra-red radiation, Part 7: Digital audio signals for conference and similar applications", "authors": "IEC Technical Committee 100 (Audio, video and multimedia systems and equipment)", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission (webstore abstract)", "date": "2003-05-22", "kind": "International standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission; the full text is sold, the abstract is free)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/5660", "summary": "The international standard for digital multichannel infrared audio transmission, written for conference interpretation and similar uses; only its abstract and catalogue details are public.", "findings": [ "Describes the characteristics of a digital, multiple-channel, multiple-carrier infrared audio transmission system, as an extension of conference interpretation or similar systems.", "Uses the subcarrier frequency ranges 45 kHz to 1 MHz and 2 MHz to 6 MHz.", "First edition, published 22 May 2003 by IEC TC 100 (26 pages); the IEC webstore lists a stability date of 2040 and no revision under development." ], "limitations": "Abstract and catalogue details only: the requirements are behind a paywall and were not read. It is framed for conference interpretation, which this site does not cover, and its abstract says nothing about assistive listening receivers, sunlight or lighting. Other parts of the series include Part 1 (general measurement methods) and Part 2 (wideband audio systems), both published in 1997, whose abstracts were also read on the IEC webstore.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "infrared-limits" ] }, { "id": "yanz-pehringer-2003", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/yanz-pehringer-2003/", "title": "Quantifying Telecoil Performance in the Ear: Common Practices and a New Protocol", "authors": "Yanz JL, Pehringer J", "publisher": "Seminars in Hearing 24(1):71-80 (Thieme)", "date": "2003-03-13", "kind": "Paper (journal article: practice survey and proposed protocol)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Manufacturer (Jerry L. Yanz was vice-president of education at Micro-Tech Hearing Instruments, a hearing aid maker; James Pehringer was president of Pehratek Products and an audiologist at Allied Hearing Services; the abstract does not say who makes the new inductive signal source the article presents)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-2003-37909", "summary": "A survey of how audiologists evaluate hearing aid telecoils, with a proposed protocol for setting the telecoil programme, from a themed issue on telephones and telecoils.", "findings": [ "Reports survey data showing no clear pattern in how audiologists evaluate hearing aids with telecoils; the great majority relied on informal patient judgments of sound quality rather than probe-microphone or speech-recognition measures.", "Reviews formal telecoil-fitting protocols and finds that none has gained wide acceptance, perhaps because of the time and equipment they need.", "Argues that protocols using an induction loop input do not represent telephone use, and proposes a seven-step protocol that uses a standard inductive signal source to play a known speech or noise signal while the telecoil memory is programmed." ], "limitations": "Read from the publisher's abstract only; the full text, including the survey's size, method and date, could not be read. The article is about telephone use and dates from 2003. Its authors worked for a hearing aid maker and Pehratek Products.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "telecoil-fitting" ] }, { "id": "roberts-2002", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/roberts-2002/", "title": "Effects of hearing loss on echo thresholds", "authors": "Roberts RA, Besing J, Koehnke J", "publisher": "Ear and Hearing 23(4):349-357", "date": "2002-08-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (University of South Florida)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12195177", "summary": "Compared echo thresholds, the delay at which two sounds are heard as two, between listeners with normal hearing and with hearing loss.", "findings": [ "8 listeners with normal hearing and 9 with hearing loss; pairs of 4 ms noise bursts 2 to 16 ms apart, at 10 to 50 dB sensation level.", "Listeners with hearing loss had higher echo thresholds than listeners with normal hearing.", "In both groups, echo thresholds at 10 dB sensation level were significantly higher than at 40 dB." ], "limitations": "Short noise bursts and delays up to 16 ms; not speech and not the longer delays found in large rooms.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "asha-2002-fm-guidelines", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/asha-2002-fm-guidelines/", "title": "Guidelines for Fitting and Monitoring FM Systems", "authors": "ASHA Ad Hoc Committee on FM Systems", "publisher": "American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA practice policy)", "date": "2002-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Professional guidance (practice guideline)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, the professional association of audiologists and speech-language pathologists; written by its ad hoc committee on FM systems, chaired by Arthur Boothroyd)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.asha.org/policy/gl2002-00010/", "summary": "ASHA's guideline for selecting, fitting and checking personal FM systems, including how to set up and measure FM receivers coupled to hearing aids through a neck loop.", "findings": [ "Says that when a personal FM system is considered, the hearing aids must have suitable coupling: direct audio input, or, \"if neck loop coupling is to be used, they should have sensitive telecoils\", with switch options such as microphone, telephone and both.", "For electroacoustic checks in a 2-cc coupler, says the hearing aid and neck loop must be in the same relative positions and orientations as on the listener, and that the best way to achieve this is to place the neck loop and hearing aid on a person, preferably the user, or else another person or a manikin.", "In its verification procedure, asks that the shape and orientation of the loop, and the distance and orientation of the aid relative to the loop, be the same as in actual use, and sets the FM receiver's volume so that a 65 dB SPL, 1 kHz input to the FM microphone gives the same output as the same input to the hearing aid microphone.", "Notes, citing earlier studies, that some FM-hearing aid combinations produce undesired results, and lists neck loops among the spare accessories users should keep for daily checks." ], "limitations": "Written for personal FM systems used by children and adults, not for venue receivers, and approved by ASHA's Legislative Council in 1999 as a revision of 1994 guidelines; ASHA asks that it be cited as 2002. It sets no field-strength or frequency-response targets for neck loops.", "accessed": "2026-10-10", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "grant-greenberg-2001", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/grant-greenberg-2001/", "title": "Speech intelligibility derived from asynchronous processing of auditory-visual information", "authors": "Grant KW, Greenberg S", "publisher": "Proceedings of Auditory-Visual Speech Processing (AVSP) 2001, pp. 132-137 (ISCA Archive)", "date": "2001-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Conference paper", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Walter Reed Army Medical Center and International Computer Science Institute; US National Science Foundation grant)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.isca-archive.org/avsp_2001/grant01_avsp.html", "summary": "Measured how audio-visual speech intelligibility changes when the sound leads or lags the talker's face.", "findings": [ "Nine listeners with normal hearing watched recorded sentences with the audio reduced to two narrow frequency bands; with audio and video in step, intelligibility averaged 63%.", "When the audio led the video, intelligibility fell appreciably even at the shortest lead tested, 40 ms, and declined further with longer leads.", "When the video led (the audio lagged), intelligibility stayed relatively stable for lags up to about 160 to 200 ms." ], "limitations": "Nine listeners with normal hearing; audio deliberately filtered to two narrow bands rather than full-bandwidth speech; recorded speech rather than a live room.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2000-en-301-462", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2000-en-301-462/", "title": "ETSI EN 301 462 V1.1.1: Human Factors (HF); Symbols to identify telecommunications facilities for deaf and hard of hearing people", "authors": "ETSI Technical Committee Human Factors (HF)", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2000-03-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "European Standard (telecommunications series)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI, the European telecommunications standards organisation, whose members include manufacturers)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301400_301499/301462/01.01.01_60/en_301462v010101p.pdf", "summary": "The European standard symbols for facilities for deaf and hard of hearing people, among them a general symbol (an ear crossed by a diagonal bar) and a symbol for inductive coupling to hearing aids (the same ear with a T).", "findings": [ "Defines Graphical Symbol No. 1 for general facilities for deaf and hard of hearing people: a stylised ear crossed by a diagonal bar. It says such a general symbol can be the base of a set of symbols for specific facilities, made by adding graphic elements.", "Defines Graphical Symbol No. 10 for inductive coupling: the same ear and bar with a letter T at the lower right, to show that a hearing aid or other device can be inductively coupled to a telecommunication terminal. It notes that hearing aids that switch to a pick-up coil often use the letter T for that setting, citing IEC 60118-11.", "Also defines symbols for telephone amplification, electrical coupling, text telephones and videotelephones.", "Applies to telecommunication equipment and services, to public information signs and telecommunication directories that identify such facilities, and to packaging and product documentation. It encourages use of the symbols, saying this would be \"likely to increase the usage of the facilities provided\".", "States that the symbols were designed and tested to be acceptable to as many deaf and hard of hearing people as possible; the testing is reported in ETSI TR 101 767, a separate record." ], "limitations": "Written for telecommunication facilities such as public telephones, not for room hearing loops or other venue systems, although its scope takes in public information signs. Adopted on 11 February 2000; ETSI lists no later version. It predates Bluetooth broadcast audio. The symbols are drawings; their description here comes from viewing them.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "etsi-2000-tr-101-767", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/etsi-2000-tr-101-767/", "title": "ETSI TR 101 767 V1.1.1: Human Factors (HF); Symbols to identify telecommunications facilities for deaf and hard of hearing people; Development and evaluation", "authors": "ETSI Technical Committee Human Factors (HF)", "publisher": "European Telecommunications Standards Institute", "date": "2000-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Standards technical report (symbol design and user testing)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (ETSI; the trials in Portugal, the Netherlands, Belgium and Finland were organised with a university department, a research institute and associations of deaf and hard of hearing people in each country)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/101700_101799/101767/01.01.01_60/tr_101767v010101p.pdf", "summary": "ETSI's account of how the symbols in EN 301 462 were designed and tested with deaf, hard of hearing and hearing people in four European countries.", "findings": [ "Reports that, before the work, the most common symbol for deaf and hard of hearing people was the general one, frequently combined with the letter T to denote inductive coupling for hearing aids, or with text in a particular language.", "In the main trials in Portugal, the Netherlands, Belgium and Finland, about 216 respondents in four groups (prelingually deaf, postlingually deaf, hard of hearing, and hearing people such as carers) matched candidate symbols from several design families to described facilities. Coupling symbols were shown only to the hard of hearing and hearing groups.", "The candidate chosen for inductive coupling was identified correctly 43% of the time, against 55% for the best-scoring alternative; the candidate chosen for general facilities was identified correctly 38% of the time, the highest of the three leading candidates.", "Reports that coupling was the most confusing topic: inductive coupling to hearing aids was understood by those who used it, while respondents had difficulty telling infrared and radio coupling symbols apart, which the authors relate to their lack of experience of those links.", "After the trials, symbol standards committees (IEC SC3) asked for the symbols to be redrawn in line with existing symbol standards, and the redrawn versions were adopted in EN 301 462. The report describes no test of the redrawn versions.", "In its pilot trial, inductive, infrared and radio coupling was the most confusing issue, which the authors put down to people's lack of experience with infrared and radio coupling of hearing aids (section 8.4.2)." ], "limitations": "Small groups in each country, recruited through deaf and hard of hearing organisations, with recognition tested in paper questionnaires rather than in buildings. Telephony facilities only; the project brochure reproduced in the report scheduled the main trials for April to June 1998, and the report gives no exact trial dates. The respondent total is summed here from the report's table by country and group.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "bakke-1999", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bakke-1999/", "title": "Large area assistive listening systems (ALS): review and recommendations", "authors": "Bakke MH, Levitt H, Ross M, Erickson F", "publisher": "Final report to the U.S. Access Board; Lexington School for the Deaf, Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Hearing Enhancement", "date": "1999-12-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Government-commissioned research report", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Government (U.S. Department of Education, NIDRR grant H133E30015; final report to the U.S. Access Board)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.access-board.gov/files/research/assistive-listening-systems.pdf", "summary": "Reviewed loop, FM and infrared systems, held focus groups with users, manufacturers and installers, and tested what signal quality listeners with hearing loss accept, to recommend performance standards to the U.S. Access Board.", "findings": [ "Section 2.1.4 (printed p. 8) explains that an M/T position keeps both microphone and telecoil operating so a listener can also hear surrounding sounds, giving nearby comments during a lecture or stage performance as an example.", "Sections 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 describe selecting a hearing aid's telecoil position to receive a loop and an M/T position with both microphone and telecoil active. Section 2.2.3 describes neckloop and silhouette couplers for telecoil users and direct audio input as a wired connection from an FM or infrared receiver to a hearing aid that accepts it. These are descriptions of coupling paths, not current model availability.", "49 adults with sensorineural hearing loss, in six audiometric groups, and 10 with normal hearing rated recorded sentences under reverberation and noise, induction-loop noise and peak clipping. Ratings were similar across degrees and shapes of hearing loss, so the authors made one set of recommendations for all, based on the 75th percentile of ratings from listeners with hearing loss.", "Recommended, measured at the earphones, a Speech Transmission Index of at least 0.84, a signal-to-noise ratio of at least 18 dB, peak clipping no more than 18 dB below peak, and receiver output of 110 to 118 dB SPL with at least 50 dB of volume range.", "Recommended at least one neckloop for every four headphone-type receivers, 3.5 mm receiver outputs, low-battery warnings, one trained person to issue, check in and maintain receivers, and training for installers, whose competence was a recurring concern in all focus groups.", "Recommended signs saying exactly where receivers can be obtained, and posting the FM frequencies and infrared subcarriers in use for people who bring their own receivers.", "Reports that a proposal to standardise FM and infrared transmission was not taken up for fear of stifling innovation, and calls instead for a \"universal\" receiver covering FM, infrared and loops.", "Its review of earlier studies found that loop, FM and infrared systems all improved speech scores over public-address listening, with small differences between them, and that listeners with normal hearing also benefited in large auditoriums.", "Reported that only about 30% of hearing aids in the United States then had a telecoil.", "Described induction loops as the oldest and least used of the three systems in the US (used much more often in Europe), rarely in direct competition with infrared and FM for new installations, and said this was unlikely to change unless more people with hearing loss, or their hearing aid dispensers, chose hearing aids with telecoils.", "Said infrared systems from different companies are not always compatible, even on the same subcarrier, because they may differ in pre-processing and receiver characteristics, and that complete compatibility may be questionable when one maker's FM receiver is used with another maker's transmitter.", "Listed the duties of the trained person who lends receivers: putting rechargeable batteries on charge after each performance, checking disposable batteries before each performance, a listening test on every receiver before lending it, helping listeners choose headphones, neckloop or earbuds, and hygiene after return, such as wiping foam cushions with an antiseptic solution and replacing disposable ones.", "On infrared: 95 kHz was the most used subcarrier, by informal agreement among makers rather than a standard; 250 kHz was added for stereo, and 300 kHz, 2.3 MHz and 2.8 MHz were coming into use, partly because new fluorescent lamp ballasts interfered at 95 kHz.", "No standard set the infrared level needed at seats, and makers traded emitter power against receiver sensitivity; adding emitters overcomes all but the most unfavourable light, such as direct sunlight, but reception \"may be uncertain and has to be empirically determined in each venue\".", "The common infrared receiver was the under-chin stethoset, whose tubing adds resonant peaks; some under-chin jacks did not take standard neckloop plugs, body receivers with a front lens suited an overhead emitter poorly, and no infrared receiver had a low-battery light.", "A few infrared transmitters were reportedly usable at some outdoor venues, though not in direct sunlight.", "Recommends that the same trained person, at the same place in the venue, both checks receivers out and checks them back in, and can operate and troubleshoot them.", "Section 5.2, Distributing Receivers (printed page 27), also recommends briefly instructing users in receiver operation and supplying a simple instruction card when necessary, alongside help choosing the coupling arrangement.", "Explains that differences in modulation, filters and emitter power help explain why different infrared receivers perform differently with a given system.", "Says turning one's back to the emitter, or putting an infrared receiver in a pocket, can eliminate or distort the audio, and that sunlight and incandescent light contain a great deal of infrared energy.", "Says any number of infrared systems can be used in adjacent auditoriums without interference or spillover.", "Says that with an incompatible receiver a signal may be received, and even understood, but with reduced clarity (section 2.3).", "Section 2.3 (printed p. 16) explains the analogue infrared path: the audio frequency-modulates an RF subcarrier, which then amplitude-modulates the infrared light emitted by the diodes.", "Section 2.3 (printed p. 16) distinguishes the infrared light carrier from the RF subcarrier carrying the audio and describes using several subcarriers for separate audio channels. This supports the subcarrier/channel distinction without treating the report's historical frequencies as current recommendations." ], "limitations": "Analogue-era systems and listening tests from 1999; the criteria rest on ratings of recorded sentences, not venue measurements. These are recommendations to the Access Board, not an enforceable standard, and the report predates Bluetooth streaming.", "accessed": "2026-10-14", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "audio-level", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "commissioning-tests", "future-proofing", "finding-and-joining", "listener-preference", "infrared-limits", "rf-fm-bands", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "neckloops", "healthcare-settings", "using-each-system" ] }, { "id": "access-board-1999-ada-proposal", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/access-board-1999-ada-proposal/", "title": "Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities; Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) Accessibility Guidelines: proposed rule", "authors": "US Access Board", "publisher": "Federal Register 64(220), 62248-62538", "date": "1999-11-16", "kind": "Regulatory proposal and explanatory preamble", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Access Board)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1999-11-16/html/99-29250.htm", "summary": "The historical explanation for replacing the ADA receiver requirement of a flat 4% of seating with a sliding scale.", "findings": [ "The discussion of section 219.3 says the advisory committee recommended a sliding scale based on actual and anecdotal evidence that the existing 4% requirement exceeded demand, especially in large facilities.", "The proposal retained approximately 4% provision through 500 seats and reduced provision for larger seating capacities.", "The proposal added a hearing-aid-compatible share of 25% of receivers, with a minimum of two.", "The preceding discussion notes separate Department of Justice obligations to provide auxiliary aids where needed for effective communication." ], "limitations": "A historical proposal, not the current design standard. The cited discussion supplies no underlying venue sample, lending records or hearing-loss prevalence study for its actual and anecdotal evidence. Its summary percentages should not replace the incremental calculation in the adopted Table 219.3.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "audience-need" ] }, { "id": "doj-1999-crown-theaters-settlement", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-1999-crown-theaters-settlement/", "title": "Settlement Agreement between the United States of America and Crown Theaters re: assistive listening systems in theaters (DOJ complaint number 202-14-34)", "authors": "US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section; Crown Theaters", "publisher": "US Department of Justice (ADA archive)", "date": "1999-03-08", "kind": "Regulatory enforcement (settlement agreement)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice, which enforces Title III of the ADA; the other party is the cinema chain that settled)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://archive.ada.gov/crownth.htm", "summary": "A Department of Justice settlement with a cinema chain, after a complaint about too few receivers at one theatre, setting receiver numbers, staff training, monthly testing and notice of outages.", "findings": [ "Followed a complaint that the three-screen, 1,074-seat Crown Cine Theater in Danbury, Connecticut, built before the ADA took effect, had too few assistive listening receivers; it had 15. The chain agreed to provide 27 there, which the agreement calls equal to at least 2% of the seats, with at least one receiver with a neckloop in each auditorium (three in all).", "States that it does not change the chain's duty to provide receivers for at least 4% of seats in newly built auditoriums, under the 1991 Standards.", "Requires steps, which may include staff training, so that staff know the systems are available, know where the receivers are kept so that requests can be met promptly, and can give basic instruction, answer questions and complaints (including by telephone) and test the equipment.", "Paragraph 15 requires each theatre to test all receivers and transmitters at least monthly, and immediately test any receiver or transmitter about which a customer complains. Staff must keep test records and report equipment problems to the Chief Operating Officer. By the next business day when repair facilities are open after a need is discovered, action must be initiated so that repair or replacement occurs as soon as practicable; this is not a next-day completion deadline.", "Requires theatres whose systems are out of service for more than 48 hours to say so on their recorded telephone message, with an estimated repair date, and to give free passes, a refund and an apology to a customer and companions who could not attend because a system was not working and no such notice had been given.", "Requires signs at theatres that had none and a mention of the systems in recorded telephone announcements, in addition to the chain's existing newspaper advertising." ], "limitations": "One negotiated settlement under the 1991 Standards, before the 2010 Standards set the current receiver table and the 25% hearing-aid-compatible share; the 2% figure applied to an existing theatre built before the ADA. A settlement binds only its parties, and this one states that it is not an admission of a violation. The archived copy leaves the signature dates blank and ends with the date 5 February 2001; the date used here is the one the Department's enforcement archive gives for the agreement (8 March 1999), which fits the agreement's first deadline of 30 August 1999.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loan-receivers", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "neckloops", "theatres-and-cinemas", "complaints-and-cases" ] }, { "id": "itu-r-1998-bt1359", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/itu-r-1998-bt1359/", "title": "Relative timing of sound and vision for broadcasting (Recommendation ITU-R BT.1359-1)", "authors": "International Telecommunication Union, Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R)", "publisher": "ITU-R", "date": "1998-11-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "International recommendation (television broadcasting)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Telecommunication Union, Radiocommunication Sector)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BT.1359-1-199811-I/en", "summary": "Sets tolerances for how far television sound may lead or lag the picture, based on viewer tests in Japan, Switzerland and Australia.", "findings": [ "On average, viewers detected an offset when sound led the picture by about 45 ms or lagged it by about 125 ms, and found it unacceptable beyond about 90 ms lead or 185 ms lag.", "Recommends that the overall sound-to-picture offset not exceed +90 ms (sound early) or -185 ms (sound late).", "The tolerance is asymmetric: late sound is detected at larger offsets than early sound." ], "limitations": "Television viewing by general audiences, not listeners with hearing loss and not live venues; based on tests from the 1990s.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "delay", "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "ed-1998-postsecondary-auxiliary-aids", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ed-1998-postsecondary-auxiliary-aids/", "title": "Auxiliary Aids and Services for Postsecondary Students with Disabilities", "authors": "US Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights", "publisher": "US Department of Education", "date": "1998-09-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Government guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (US Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/individuals-disabilities/auxiliary-aids-and-services-for-postsecondary-students-with-disabilities", "summary": "Federal guidance on effective auxiliary aids in higher education under Section 504 and ADA Title II.", "findings": [ "Section 504 applies to recipients of Department of Education funding, including colleges and universities; Title II applies to public colleges, universities, and graduate and professional schools.", "Lists assistive listening devices and systems as auxiliary aids. Institutions must provide effective aids in time for participation, consult students, and give primary consideration to individual requests under Title II.", "Postsecondary students must identify their need and give adequate notice. The institution must assess effectiveness in the particular setting, including differences between a lecture and a seminar.", "An institution must make necessary nonpersonal aids available unless this would cause undue burden, and cannot charge the student for them. It remains responsible even when arranging help from an outside agency.", "Individually prescribed devices and services of a personal nature are excluded from the institution’s duty; this does not remove the duty to provide educational auxiliary aids." ], "limitations": "Guidance revised September 1998; the page separately says it was last reviewed on 23 September 2025. Not a current device guide or a substitute for the regulations. Does not address Title III or prescribe a listening technology.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lecture-halls" ] }, { "id": "iec-60118-4-1998-amendment", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-60118-4-1998-amendment/", "title": "IEC 60118-4:1981/AMD1:1998 Amendment 1 - Hearing aids. Part 4: Magnetic field strength in audio-frequency induction loops for hearing aid purposes", "authors": "IEC TC 29", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "1998-06-05", "kind": "Standard amendment (public catalogue)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/13425", "summary": "The catalogue dates the amendment to the first hearing-loop standard and its later withdrawal.", "findings": [ "Amendment 1 was published on 5 June 1998; the catalogue lists three pages.", "The catalogue gives 27 October 2006 as its withdrawal date." ], "limitations": "The public catalogue gives no technical account of the amendment. The paid text was not read, so the changed limits or methods cannot be reported.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "iec-60849-1998", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-60849-1998/", "title": "IEC 60849:1998: Sound systems for emergency purposes", "authors": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "publisher": "IEC Webstore", "date": "1998-02-26", "kind": "Withdrawn standard (publisher abstract)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/18083", "summary": "The IEC catalogue marks the former emergency sound-system standard withdrawn.", "findings": [ "The abstract covers sound reinforcement and distribution for rapid, orderly mobilization of occupants of indoor or outdoor areas affected by a hazard, and systems broadcasting information to protect life and property during an emergency.", "The catalogue gives edition 2.0, publication on 26 February 1998 and withdrawal on 25 January 2008." ], "limitations": "Only the public catalogue and abstract were read. The full 43-page standard was not accessed. The catalogue does not identify a successor; European replacement history is supported separately by BSI’s EN 50849 overview.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "noe-1997-group-listening-headsets", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/noe-1997-group-listening-headsets/", "title": "The Use of Large Group Assistive Listening Devices With and Without Hearing Aids in an Adult Classroom Setting", "authors": "Noe CM, Davidson SA, Mishler PJ", "publisher": "American Journal of Audiology 6(3):48-63 (ASHA)", "date": "1997-11-01", "datePrecision": "day", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (publisher abstract)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Ohio State University and US Veterans Affairs affiliations; funding not stated in the readable abstract)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://pubs.asha.org/doi/10.1044/1059-0889.0603.48", "summary": "An adult workshop compared group listening systems with no system, including headset use without hearing aids.", "findings": [ "The sample comprised 10 listeners with normal hearing and 18 with sensorineural hearing loss. FM, infrared and loops improved word recognition relative to no system in both groups.", "Listeners with hearing loss performed better and preferred these three systems through headsets rather than inductively coupled to their own hearing aids. Both groups preferred FM for performance, comfort and ease of use." ], "limitations": "Publisher abstract read through a 25 November 2021 Wayback Machine copy after the direct page returned 403. Full methods, device models, effect sizes and funding were inaccessible. A 1997 comparison cannot rank current products. The study's sound-field arm is outside venue-system scope and is not used here.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "iec-61603-2-1997", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-61603-2-1997/", "title": "IEC 61603-2:1997 Transmission of audio and/or video and related signals using infra-red radiation, Part 2: Transmission systems for audio wide band and related signals", "authors": "IEC Subcommittee 100C (Equipment and systems in the field of audio, video and audiovisual engineering)", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission (webstore abstract and publisher's preview)", "date": "1997-02-28", "kind": "International standard", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission; the full text is sold, while the abstract and a preview of the first pages are free)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/5656", "summary": "The international standard for measuring and specifying wideband audio infrared transmission systems; one assistive listening maker cites its band and channel definitions. Only the abstract and first pages are public.", "findings": [ "Gives methods for measuring and specifying the characteristics of wideband audio infrared systems not covered by Part 1, so that systems using the available bandwidth differently can be described and conclusions drawn about interference and compatibility.", "Replaces chapter 1 of IEC 764, which covered only two carrier frequencies for analogue audio and nothing on digital audio.", "Says radiators normally consist of infrared diodes with peak emission between 830 and 950 nm and an infrared bandwidth of about 100 nm. It defines wideband audio as bandwidth sufficient for reproduction to resemble natural sound; a note ties this to a minimum upper frequency of 12.5 kHz and includes digital audio up to about 20 kHz.", "Is to be read with IEC 1147 (IEC 61147), a 1993 technical report on preventing interference between infrared systems. Its contents list sections on channel allocations and modulation, rated signal-to-noise ratio and sensitivity, whose requirements are in the paid text.", "First edition, prepared by IEC subcommittee 100C; the webstore lists 35 pages, a consolidated version with Amendment 1 (2004), and a stability date of 2038.", "The catalogue lifecycle metadata dates the first edition to 28 February 1997, Amendment 1 to 7 April 2004 and consolidated edition 1.1 to 17 May 2004. These are publication dates; the amendment requirements were not read." ], "limitations": "Only the webstore abstract and the free preview (cover, contents, foreword, scope, normative references and the first definitions) were read; the preview file was published by VDE Verlag. The channel allocations and all requirements were not read. The preview says nothing about sunlight, receivers or assistive listening by name.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "infrared-limits" ] }, { "id": "mckinnon-1994", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/mckinnon-1994/", "title": "Electromagnetic Interference in Hearing Aid T-Coil Applications", "authors": "McKinnon B (Mc² Systems Design Group)", "publisher": "Mc² Systems Design Group (paper first presented at the 1994 CAA Conference, Ottawa)", "date": "1994-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "Conference paper (consultant's case study)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Independent (Mc² Systems Design Group, an acoustics and sound-system design consultancy that specifies assistive listening systems, retained by the building's architect to investigate complaints)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.mcsquared.com/classic/caa94.htm", "summary": "A consultant's investigation of the magnetic interference that made telecoil listening difficult in a new university building, with field readings, the sources traced and the limited remedies available.", "findings": [ "Investigated complaints from staff using telecoils in a newly built University of British Columbia building, using a telephone-type magnetic field meter (300 Hz to 3.3 kHz) carried at ear level.", "Fluorescent ballasts were ruled out (one meter bar, about -31 dB re 1 A/m, only within 300 mm of a fitting); a television monitor and computer gave broadband noise up to the meter's pass level within 1.5 m, and listeners could reduce it by finding a head orientation that picked up less.", "The worst hum came from ground currents of about 1 A, from other buildings, flowing on steam and water pipes under the floor; the author puts the signal-to-noise ratio for telephone listening at about 0 dB in most cases.", "Grounding the pipes at the service entry cut the field along them by about 4 dB but raised it near the worst-affected office; the ideal fix, insulating breaks in the pipes, was no longer possible. Interference across a basement seminar room from the building's 600 A three-phase service was dealt with by using an FM listening system, as shielding the room was impractical.", "Reports that a follow-up found interference in some locations in most buildings on the campus, and recommends keeping electrical service entries, major electrical rooms and transformers away from rooms where people use telecoils." ], "limitations": "One building investigated in the early 1990s, with a meter designed for telephone handsets, so levels are not on the IEC 60118-4 scale; the signal-to-noise figure refers to telephone use rather than a loop, and the noise sources include CRT monitors of the period. The campus-wide finding is reported without data. Presented at a 1994 conference and republished on the consultancy's own site; its security certificate could not be verified when read.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-limits" ] }, { "id": "doj-1993-title-iii-technical-assistance-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-1993-title-iii-technical-assistance-manual/", "title": "ADA Title III Technical Assistance Manual, section III-1.5000 Religious entities", "authors": "US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division", "publisher": "US Department of Justice (ada.gov)", "date": "1993-11-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Regulatory guidance (technical assistance manual)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice; issued under section 506 of the ADA, which provides for technical assistance)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ada.gov/resources/title-iii-manual/", "summary": "The Department of Justice's manual on Title III of the ADA, explaining that religious organisations and the entities they control, including places of worship, are exempt from Title III.", "findings": [ "States that religious entities are exempt from the requirements of Title III of the ADA, and that a religious entity is still subject to the employment duties of Title I if it has enough employees.", "Defines a religious entity as a religious organisation or an entity controlled by one, including a place of worship, and says the exemption is intended to have broad application: an organisation with a lay board can still qualify.", "Says the exemption covers all of a religious entity's activities, \"whether religious or secular\"; its example is a congregation that runs a day care centre and a private school for members and non-members alike, which remains exempt.", "A private, non-religious organisation that rents a congregation's premises to run a place of public accommodation is covered by Title III, while the congregation as landlord stays exempt; a non-religious organisation using donated space, with no lease under which rent or other consideration is paid, is exempt.", "Lists assistive listening systems and devices among the auxiliary aids that Title III requires covered businesses to provide where needed for effective communication, a duty from which the exemption frees religious entities.", "Section III-1.2000 lists pharmacies, professional offices of health care providers and hospitals among the service establishments that count as places of public accommodation under Title III." ], "limitations": "A 1993 explanation of the law, not the statute or regulation itself, and it says nothing specific about places of worship beyond the exemption. It does not discuss state or local building codes or other laws that may still apply to a place of worship. ada.gov shows the manual as \"Last updated: November 01, 1993\"; it is cited here by month.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship", "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "dot-1991-ada-vehicles", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/dot-1991-ada-vehicles/", "title": "49 CFR Part 38: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility specifications for transportation vehicles", "authors": "US Department of Transportation", "publisher": "eCFR", "date": "1991-09-06", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Transportation)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/part-38", "summary": "The US rules for accessible buses, rail cars and other transit vehicles, which require public address systems for stop and station announcements and, in an advisory appendix, describe listening systems including induction loops.", "findings": [ "Section 38.35: buses over 22 feet long used in multiple-stop, fixed-route service must have a public address system so the driver, or recorded or digitised speech, can announce stops and give other passenger information. Rapid rail, light rail, commuter rail and intercity rail cars must likewise have public address systems (sections 38.61, 38.87, 38.103 and 38.121).", "The required text names no assistive listening system for vehicles. Each rail section adds that \"Alternative systems or devices which provide equivalent access are also permitted\"; the bus section does not.", "The advisory appendix (part V) encourages services, signs or devices that give the same or equivalent information to people with hearing loss, naming visual displays and listening systems, and notes that visual displays serve deaf people while listening systems \"aid only those with a partial loss of hearing\".", "The appendix says a listening system for transit vehicles, where the listeners are not known in advance, may differ from one provided to a particular individual; that \"At the present time, magnetic induction loops are the most feasible type of listening system for people who use hearing aids equipped with 'T-coils'\"; and that radio-frequency systems \"can be extremely effective and inexpensive\" but need a special receiver for hearing aid users.", "It warns that some listening systems may be subject to interference from other equipment, which careful engineering design can control.", "Does not mention Bluetooth or Auracast. Separately, 49 CFR 37.167 requires stop announcements on fixed routes at transfer points, major intersections, destination points and on request.", "The official 1 October 2025 CFR edition, sections 38.35, 38.61, 38.87, 38.103 and 38.121, and Appendix part V, supports the bus and rail public-address requirements, the rail allowance for equivalent alternatives, and the advisory discussion of loops and radio receivers. This edition was read because the archived eCFR page held only a contents list and current full-text requests were blocked." ], "limitations": "The appendix is advisory and was written with the 1991 rule; its views on loops and radio systems predate digital and Bluetooth systems. The earlier record described an eCFR reading on 9 October 2026, but the archived page contains only a contents list. This audit verified the claims in the official 1 October 2025 CFR edition linked from that page; subsequent amendments were not independently checked. The record date is that of the original 1991 rule (56 FR 45756). The rules for stations and other transportation facilities are separate (DOT's ADA Standards for Transportation Facilities).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "transport" ] }, { "id": "doj-1991-ada-standards", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/doj-1991-ada-standards/", "title": "Department of Justice ADA Title III Regulation 28 CFR Part 36 (1991), including the 1991 Standards for Accessible Design", "authors": "US Department of Justice", "publisher": "US Department of Justice (archived ada.gov)", "date": "1991-07-26", "kind": "Regulation", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (US Department of Justice)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://archive.ada.gov/reg3a.html", "summary": "The original Title III regulation and design standards establish the historical assistive-listening requirements used before the 2010 revision.", "findings": [ "The page identifies 26 July 1991 as the publication date of the regulation.", "Appendix A, 4.1.3(19)(b), requires permanent systems in assembly areas where audible communication is integral, there is fixed seating, and either capacity is at least 50 persons or audio amplification is provided. Other assembly areas require a permanent system or outlets or wiring to support a portable system.", "The same clause requires receivers for at least 4% of seats, with a minimum of two, and signs announcing availability.", "Section 4.33.7 identifies induction loops, infrared and radio-frequency systems and relates selection to setting, programme and audience." ], "limitations": "Historical regulation, not a statement of the current rule for a particular building. The 2010 Standards and their transition provisions must be consulted for later work; this record does not determine any existing facility exception.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "salzbrenner-1991", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/salzbrenner-1991/", "title": "Probe-tube measurements of ALDs: uniformity, linearity and frequency response differences", "authors": "Salzbrenner LG, Newman CW, Goldstein BA", "publisher": "British Journal of Audiology 25(2):85-92", "date": "1991-04-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (probe-tube measurements on one wearer)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (Cleveland Hearing and Speech Center, Ohio, according to the PubMed record; no funder is named there)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://doi.org/10.3109/03005369109079838", "summary": "Probe-tube measurements in one wearer's ear of six assistive listening devices, including an infrared system, an induction floor loop and a personal amplifier used with a neck loop, comparing telecoil and direct coupling.", "findings": [ "The abstract's first two sentences identify the Madsen IGO 1000 and describe in-situ measurements of sample uniformity, volume-control linearity, ear-coupling effects on canal resonance and frequency-response differences.", "Measured three samples each of six devices in the ear of one wearer: a Sound Plus infrared system, a Minicon induction floor loop, a Phonic Ear Phonear, a Radio Shack personal amplifier, and a Williams Sound PockeTalker used with an induction neck loop and wired directly.", "The devices were generally uniform from sample to sample, although both PockeTalker versions varied in gain at all frequencies.", "Devices coupled without a telecoil had broader, flatter responses than devices coupled through a telecoil, while the average differences between telecoil and non-telecoil coupling were minimal.", "The earbud had almost no effect on the ear canal's resonance and lightweight headphones reduced it slightly; the authors conclude that probe-tube measurement is a feasible way to assess assistive listening devices on the wearer." ], "limitations": "Read from the PubMed abstract only. One wearer, equipment of about 1990, and no listener outcomes; the abstract does not give the size of the frequency-response differences.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "nabelek-1986-classroom", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nabelek-1986-classroom/", "title": "Comparison of amplification systems in a classroom", "authors": "Nábělek AK, Donahue AM, Letowski TR", "publisher": "Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 23(1):41-52", "date": "1986-01-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Government (PubMed indexes US Public Health Service research support and NIH/NINDS grant R01 NS 12035; the abstract gives no funding detail)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3958997/", "summary": "Compared word recognition through an induction loop, an FM system, an infrared system and a public-address system in a medium-size classroom.", "findings": [ "PubMed dates the article to January 1986. Its Grants and funding section lists NIH grant R01 NS 12035, and its publication types include US government research support.", "Listener groups were people with normal hearing, people with hearing loss, hearing-aid users and older adults; words were tested with 12-voice babble at +8 dB and without babble at +20 dB.", "For every group, all three assistive systems gave better word scores than the public-address system.", "Differences between systems depended on the listener group and on the room signal-to-noise ratio; the authors conclude that all three systems suit listeners with various degrees of hearing loss.", "The PubMed record classifies the paper as US Public Health Service-supported research and lists NIH/NINDS grant R01 NS 12035 under Grants and funding; the abstract does not state the participant count." ], "limitations": "Only the PubMed abstract and bibliographic and grant metadata were read; the full paper was not obtained, and the abstract gives no participant count or equipment models. One classroom comparison published in 1986; word tests rather than sentences.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "listener-preference", "infrared-limits", "lecture-halls", "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "hawkins-schum-1985", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hawkins-schum-1985/", "title": "Some effects of FM-system coupling on hearing aid characteristics", "authors": "Hawkins DB, Schum DJ", "publisher": "Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 50(2):132-141 (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association)", "date": "1985-05-01", "datePrecision": "month", "kind": "Peer-reviewed study (electroacoustic bench measurements)", "type": "Peer-reviewed research", "funding": "Independent (journal study; the archived abstract and metadata give no author affiliation or funder, and the full text was not read)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://pubs.asha.org/doi/10.1044/jshd.5002.132", "summary": "Measured four hearing aids alone and connected to two FM systems by direct audio input, a neck loop and a silhouette inductor, comparing frequency response, distortion, noise and input-output functions.", "findings": [ "Measured frequency response, harmonic distortion, noise levels, input-output functions and the taper of the FM receiver's volume wheel for four hearing aids, then repeated the measurements with each aid connected to two FM systems through direct input, a neck loop and a silhouette inductor.", "Found large differences in some frequency-response comparisons, with no single coupling method consistently closer to the response of the hearing aid alone.", "Distortion and noise were similar for the hearing aids alone and for the FM-hearing aid combinations, except with the silhouette inductor.", "Some combinations gave very non-linear volume-wheel curves, and input-output functions differed between the hearing aids and the FM systems; the authors conclude that a hearing aid's electroacoustic characteristics cannot be assumed to be preserved when it is connected to an FM system. Minor changes in the position of the silhouette against the aid were also investigated." ], "limitations": "Read from the PubMed abstract only; the size of the differences and the effect of moving the silhouette are not stated there. Personal classroom FM systems and hearing aids of the early 1980s, so the results describe the coupling methods rather than current products.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "iec-60118-4-1981", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-60118-4-1981/", "title": "IEC 60118-4:1981 Methods of measurement of electro-acoustical characteristis of hearing aids. Part 4: Magnetic field strength in audio-frequency induction loops for hearing aid purposes", "authors": "IEC TC 29", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "1981-01-01", "datePrecision": "year", "kind": "International standard (public catalogue)", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/13426", "summary": "The first edition of the IEC hearing-loop field-strength standard, retained in the catalogue with a withdrawal date.", "findings": [ "The catalogue identifies edition 1.0 and gives 1 January 1981 as its publication date. This record conservatively uses year precision because an independent day-level publication date was not established.", "The abstract describes a standard magnetic field strength for audio-frequency loops feeding hearing-aid induction coils, intended to provide sufficient signal relative to noise without overloading the hearing aid.", "The catalogue gives 27 October 2006 as the withdrawal date." ], "limitations": "Catalogue and abstract only; the paid nine-page text was not read. No numerical field-strength value or comparison of requirements with later editions is inferred.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [] }, { "id": "iscve-assistive-listening-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iscve-assistive-listening-guide/", "title": "A Guide to Assistive Listening Systems", "authors": "Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers", "publisher": "Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers (copy hosted by the Center for Hearing Access)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Industry guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (ISCVE, a professional audio industry institute; the guide names no funder)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/ISCVE-Guide-Assistive-Listening-Systems.pdf", "summary": "ISCVE's introductory guide asks purchasers to define users, coverage, access, audio sources and responsibility for running a system.", "findings": [ "Page 5 describes infrared receivers connected to headphones or earbuds, or to hearing devices through neckloops. Page 7 asks venues to provide enough receivers for the expected audience and keep public-use receivers maintained, clean and charged; its one-per-25-seats rule of thumb is not a jurisdiction-specific requirement.", "Pages 3-5 ask purchasers to identify users, coverage areas, confidentiality, simultaneous use of adjacent rooms including above and below, building constraints, and who will operate, maintain, distribute and clean equipment.", "Page 3 asks whether users can bring their own devices and whether the system works satisfactorily with a range of typical smartphones and receivers; it also asks who will instruct users and deal with problems.", "Page 4 asks that all room audio sources reach the assistive listening system, including media playback and both ends of video calls. It calls for a dedicated feed protected against inadvertent adjustment, so changes to the main sound-system output do not change the assistive feed.", "Page 5 describes direct telecoil access as a loop advantage, while acknowledging that an indirect system can have benefits that outweigh that convenience in some situations. Building metal, magnetic noise, spill and installation access can constrain loops.", "Page 6 recommends testing a proposed Wi-Fi system's network and latency under normal traffic and operating conditions before installation, because both network and smartphone contribute delay.", "Page 7 explains that a neckloop transfers audio magnetically to a hearing aid with a telecoil, and that neckloops can be intended for general use or a specific receiver. Venue receivers must be maintained, cleaned and kept charged.", "Page 7 asks for a list of system uses and requirements before technology selection, and a test certificate, as-installed drawings, operating instructions, maintenance requirements and equipment handbooks after installation." ], "limitations": "An introductory industry guide, not a purchasing-outcome study or a regulation. No publication date is printed; PDF creation and modification metadata are from November 2023, which does not establish a publication date. Its Auracast discussion predates products entering the market and is not used here as a current compatibility account. Its receiver rule of thumb is not a substitute for jurisdiction-specific receiver requirements. Classroom sound-field systems and personal listeners are outside this library's venue-system scope.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "procurement" ] }, { "id": "nms-accessibility", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/nms-accessibility/", "title": "Accessibility | National Museums Scotland", "authors": "National Museums Scotland", "publisher": "National Museums Scotland", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue accessibility guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (National Museums Scotland, a national museum body; its own visitor information)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.nms.ac.uk/national-museum-of-scotland/plan-your-visit/accessibility", "summary": "The museum lists fixed loops at information desks and in two presentation spaces, and hearing helpers for sessions.", "findings": [ "Lists induction loops at the Main Entrance and Tower Entrance information desks, the Auditorium and the Dunfermline Room lecture theatre.", "Says workshop staff are willing to wear microphones provided and that the museum has a set of hearing helpers staff can use during sessions." ], "limitations": "An undated statement of provision, not a listening check. Does not identify the hearing-helper technology, receiver coupling, coverage or maintenance results; it cannot establish whether equipment worked during any particular visit.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "cha-2026-ada-standards", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-2026-ada-standards/", "title": "ADA Standards for Assistive Listening Systems", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access, The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts; it states that it accepts no donations from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/ada-standards/", "summary": "The Center for Hearing Access's digest of the ADA's assistive listening requirements, with its view of which systems the ADA recognises and where audio over Wi-Fi and Auracast stand.", "findings": [ "Lists six assistive listening systems under two headings: \"Four recognized by the ADA\" (hearing loop, FM/RF system, infrared system and direct-wired equipment, which it marks as rare) and two \"Other\" systems, audio over Wi-Fi and Auracast, followed by the note \"Buyer beware.\"", "For audio over Wi-Fi it states that \"there is no known product that meets the ADA\" and that latency is problematic. For Auracast it says it is too soon to say whether individual products or installations meet the ADA, partly because the international standards are not expected until late 2027.", "Calls the ADA Standards \"descriptive and not prescriptive\" and says the places required to have an assistive listening system must have a hearing loop, FM/RF system or infrared system.", "Notes that in a hearing loop the telecoil in the hearing aid is the receiver, so no hearing-aid-compatible receivers are needed, and points to Table 219.3 for receiver numbers.", "Says the ADA's effective-communication duty also covers places without a public address system, such as service counters and meeting rooms, and that Title II and Title III entities cannot pass their assistive listening responsibilities to others through contracts or licences.", "Says hearing aids, cochlear implants and bone-anchored devices need both a telecoil and Auracast built in for the best connection to assistive listening systems." ], "limitations": "An advocacy organisation's reading of the law, not legal advice or a government interpretation; it does not discuss section 103 of the 2010 Standards (equivalent facilitation). The Center's site labels hearing loops \"Consumer Preferred\". The page shows no date; its metadata gives first publication on 19 February 2024 and a last change on 12 September 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "loop-and-auracast", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "ao-arena-accessibility-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ao-arena-accessibility-guide/", "title": "AO Arena Accessibility Guide", "authors": "AO Arena", "publisher": "AO Arena", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue accessibility guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (venue operator describing its own facilities; no external funding stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ao-arena.com/assets/doc/AO-Arena-Accessibility-Guide21.1-8839a15019.pdf", "summary": "An arena guide identifying loop-covered seats, intermittent coverage and the connection to the touring sound desk.", "findings": [ "Page 4 locates the hearing loop in Block 114, rows L-X, and accessible platforms AP 108 and AP 109.", "The same page describes intermittent coverage in Block 114 rows G-J and row X of Blocks 108 and 109, and tells hearing-aid users to select the T setting.", "The venue gives the touring sound engineer a cable to connect the loop to the touring sound desk, carrying the microphone signals. It acknowledges occasional problems and asks listeners to report difficulty to a steward or Guest Services opposite Block 101." ], "limitations": "The venue's own description, with no field-strength map, independent audit or listener study. No publication date is printed. It documents selected seats, not whole-arena loop coverage.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "listen-stadium-systems", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-stadium-systems/", "title": "Arenas and Stadiums", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer venue application page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the RF and Wi-Fi systems described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/venue/arenas-and-stadiums/", "summary": "A manufacturer describes stadium use of its dedicated radio receivers and phone-based Wi-Fi audio.", "findings": [ "The maker describes its ListenRF systems operating at 72 MHz or 216 MHz, with audio wired to a transmitter and heard through dedicated receiver units.", "Its stadium examples include ListenRF at Lambeau Field and the Seattle Seahawks stadium, and a public auditory assistance system at Dallas Cowboys Stadium.", "Its Wi-Fi description connects the audio source to a server and sends audio across a venue network to an app on listeners' devices." ], "limitations": "Undated promotional page about the maker's own products. Installation examples have no published measurement protocol, dates or occupied-bowl results. Claims of complete coverage and product superiority are not independently established here. The page names an older Wi-Fi product line; it is evidence of a delivery method, not a current product recommendation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "north-penn-assistive-listening", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/north-penn-assistive-listening/", "title": "Assistive Listening in the North Penn School District", "authors": "North Penn School District", "publisher": "North Penn School District", "date": "undated", "kind": "School service guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Pennsylvania public school district describing its provision)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://northwales.npenn.org/cms/one.aspx?pageId=21824840", "summary": "The district describes FM receiver access in its school auditoriums and multipurpose rooms, including elementary-school gyms.", "findings": [ "The district says every school’s auditorium/multipurpose room has assistive listening, using FM receivers with headphones or neckloops for telecoil-equipped hearing aids and cochlear implants.", "Receivers are obtained from audiovisual staff or the meeting/show organizer. Equipment locations include the stage in elementary-school gyms and sound-board or control-room locations in secondary auditoriums.", "The service requires a microphone in use; the district says it does not amplify ambient room sound.", "The Educational Service Center also has an installed room loop for direct telecoil reception." ], "limitations": "Operator description with no publication date, receiver quantities, measured coverage or listener results. Does not establish how reliably loans or microphone use work at events.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "iscve-training-courses", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iscve-training-courses/", "title": "Assistive Listening Technology", "authors": "ISCVE", "publisher": "Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers (UK)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Training programme (course syllabuses)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (ISCVE, the professional membership institute that delivers the courses)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://iscve.org.uk/training-development/training-courses/assistive-listening-technology/", "summary": "ISCVE describes separate courses on loop design and installation, and on measurement and certification.", "findings": [ "The design and installation course covers loop types, low overspill, field-strength calculations, cable sizing, loop height, building metalwork, magnetic noise and audio inputs, with an outline of commissioning, maintenance and documentation.", "The measurement and certification course covers what to measure and where, background noise, field strength, frequency response, test-equipment limitations, test signals, measurement positions and records.", "Target audiences include designers, installers, engineers, consultants and local authorities; the measurement course also includes equipment manufacturers and maintenance personnel.", "The accompanying training catalogue describes ISCVE courses as CPD accredited and lists these two courses under assistive listening." ], "limitations": "Course descriptions, not comparative evidence of competence or installation quality. The detailed page shows a last-change timestamp of 27 June 2023, and the catalogue 25 August 2026, without a clearly identified publication date. No upcoming course date or pass criteria are given in the retrieved detailed page. Its heading mentions infrared, but no detailed infrared syllabus is shown, so the record is tagged only for hearing loops. The catalogue is also privately archived.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "orsay-audio-guides", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/orsay-audio-guides/", "title": "Audio guides", "authors": "Musée d’Orsay", "publisher": "Musée d’Orsay", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue visitor guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Musée d’Orsay, French public museum; its own visitor information)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.musee-orsay.fr/en/visit/audio%20guides", "summary": "An archived museum page distinguishes loan audio guides with induction loops from an exhibition guide downloaded onto visitors’ phones.", "findings": [ "The archived page describes on-site loan guides for permanent collections and the main temporary exhibition, with induction loops for visitors with hearing loss.", "Separately describes a guide downloaded onto an iOS or Android phone through a QR code on the ticket or a link in the confirmation message.", "The phone guide is limited to the main temporary exhibition and excludes the permanent collections and other exhibitions." ], "limitations": "Read through the Wayback Machine snapshot of 26 July 2025 because direct access returned HTTP 403. No publication date is shown; the snapshot date is not treated as publication. This is historical visitor information, not verified current provision or a hearing-device compatibility test. It gives no phone-to-hearing-device instructions or loan-guide listening measurements.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "cha-2026-wifi", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-2026-wifi/", "title": "Audio Over Wi-Fi Assistive Listening System", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access, The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts; it asks for donations and states that it accepts none from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/wi-fi/", "summary": "The Center for Hearing Access's page on audio over Wi-Fi: where it sees the technology working, and its concerns when the room also has live sound.", "findings": [ "Says audio over Wi-Fi works well when the live sound is off, giving TVs in sports bars and fitness centres as examples.", "States that these systems \"typically have 100-500+ ms latency\" and that an acceptable delay for assistive listening is under about 30-40 ms. It says that, depending on their hearing loss, devices and settings, listeners may hear an echo or a mushy sound.", "Tells buyers to beware of claims that a product meets the ADA as an assistive listening system, and states: \"There is no known product that meets the ADA\".", "Lists further concerns: each maker has its own app, hearing devices cannot use a \"Mic + Wi-Fi\" setting, the systems are complex for users, and no third-party, peer-reviewed research shows that audio over Wi-Fi works well for people with hearing loss.", "Quotes an unnamed consumer who is also a hearing technology professional: they switched a system off because the delayed stream and the room sound together created reverberation." ], "limitations": "An advocacy page with no measurements: the latency range is not linked to any test, phone or network, and the Center's October 2025 quick guide gives 200-300+ ms for the same technology. The Center's site labels hearing loops \"Consumer Preferred\", so the page reflects its advocacy position. The page carries no date (copyright 2024-2026).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "listener-preference", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "iaha-2026-wifi", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iaha-2026-wifi/", "title": "Audio Over Wi-Fi Assistive Listening Systems", "authors": "International Association for Hearing Accessibility (IAHA)", "publisher": "International Association for Hearing Accessibility (IAHA)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Trade body guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (IAHA; its members include manufacturers of assistive listening technologies and other organisations that create or install assistive listening systems, as well as groups supporting people with hearing loss; its funding is not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://iaha-global.com/assistive-listening-technologies/audio-over-wifi/", "summary": "IAHA's explainer on audio over Wi-Fi: how it works, its advantages and limitations, and the standards it names.", "findings": [ "Describes a bring-your-own-device model: sound goes from the venue's sound system to an audio server on its Wi-Fi network and on to listeners' phones or tablets, then to hearing aids or cochlear implants by Bluetooth, a neckloop with the telecoil, or headphones.", "Lists as advantages that listeners use their own devices, can move across large areas, and can choose among several channels; that venues handle less shared equipment and fewer hygiene concerns; and that it can be deployed where loops or infrared may not be feasible.", "Lists as limitations: delay that varies with the environment, device and configuration; dependence on the quality of the Wi-Fi network; the need for a smartphone, an app and the confidence to install it; and the need for headphones or a way to connect hearing aids. It notes that a significant share of the people concerned do not have a smartphone.", "States that \"No peer reviewed studies are available\" on the benefits of Wi-Fi systems for people with hearing loss.", "Advises venues to tell visitors before they attend to bring their own device, to give access to and instructions for the app, and to provide alternative receivers for those without a smartphone.", "Under standards, states that a venue \"cannot guarantee compliance with ADA Table 219.3\" if listeners are expected to bring their own devices, and that neckloops must give a signal meeting IEC 60118-4 when measured as IEC 62489-1 specifies.", "Lists among the limitations of Wi-Fi systems that \"Performance depends on the quality and stability of the Wi-Fi network\"." ], "limitations": "A short explainer with no data or references behind its advantages and limitations. IAHA is an industry association whose members include manufacturers; the page does not say which members make Wi-Fi or competing systems. The page carries no date (copyright 2026). The site also features a Williams AV guide to real-time Wi-Fi audio, from a maker of Wi-Fi systems.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "lifetime-costs", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "sig-auracast-developer-programme", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-auracast-developer-programme/", "title": "Auracast - For Developers", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Product development and qualification programme", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG programme material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/developers/", "summary": "The SIG describes implementation guides, Bluetooth product qualification and Auracast trademark use for product developers.", "findings": [ "Directs member companies through three stages: build the product, qualify the product and apply the branding.", "Links implementation guides for transmitters, receivers and assistant applications.", "Says products supporting Auracast must complete the Bluetooth Qualification Process, and connects use of the Auracast trademarks to qualification against the Public Broadcast Profile and additional brand-guide requirements.", "The described process applies to products and member companies; the page does not describe an installer examination or commissioning measurements for an individual venue." ], "limitations": "Programme description from the trademark owner. Product qualification is not evidence of a particular venue’s coverage, audio quality or installer competence. Linked guides and qualification software were not opened for this record. No publication date is stated.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "sig-public-locations", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-public-locations/", "title": "Auracast for public locations", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/public-locations/", "summary": "The SIG's page for venues offering Auracast.", "findings": [ "The section on adding Auracast at a public location sets out three steps: deploy the broadcast, register the location and apply the branding. Steps 2 and 3 describe registration benefits and use of the trademarks under the location brand guide.", "States that the SIG \"will soon publish a deployment guide for public locations\"; no date given.", "Says the guide will remind installers of the deployment requirements for using the Auracast trademarks, including registering with the SIG, which are set out in the Public Location Brand Guide." ], "limitations": "Programme description from the trademark owner, including an announcement of a future deployment guide. It describes no installer examination and supplies no commissioning measurements for an individual venue. The page is undated; the archived original was checked on 13 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "large-venues", "commissioning-tests", "future-proofing", "signage-and-awareness", "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "sig-faq", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-faq/", "title": "Auracast frequently asked questions", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/faq/", "summary": "The SIG's answers to common questions about Auracast.", "findings": [ "To the question \"Is Auracast broadcast audio ADA compliant?\" it answers \"Absolutely\", stating that Auracast is \"fully recognized as a compliant ALS technology under the ADA\" because the ADA sets performance-based standards rather than a list of technologies and Auracast is a standards-based radio frequency system.", "Says any number of in-range receivers can join one broadcast without loss of quality, because the transmitter sends a single signal.", "Products qualified to the Public Broadcast Profile that meet the Brand Guide requirements can be licensed to use the Auracast trademarks.", "In the FAQ on the required Bluetooth version, the SIG says a product needs specific Bluetooth Core 5.2 features and the Public Broadcast Profile from the LE Audio specifications; a Bluetooth version number alone does not establish Auracast support.", "In the FAQ on upgrading existing Bluetooth devices, the SIG says field upgrades depend on the device's underlying capabilities and the supplier's product strategy; it has no visibility into specific suppliers' plans.", "In the FAQs on finding/selecting broadcasts and supported devices, the SIG describes assistants such as phones, watches or hearing-aid remotes scanning advertisements, showing available broadcasts and giving a receiver the information to join. The interface may be in the operating system or an app.", "In the FAQ on receiver numbers and bandwidth, the SIG says adding in-range receivers requires no additional broadcast bandwidth because the transmitter sends one signal; this is the trade body's explanation, not an occupied-venue capacity test." ], "limitations": "The SIG's own position; the page cites no ruling and is not a determination by the US Department of Justice or the Access Board. The page is undated; its archived original was checked on 13 October 2026. Device and upgrade answers do not establish support in any particular product.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status" ] }, { "id": "resound-2026-auracast-page", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/resound-2026-auracast-page/", "title": "Auracast hearing aids", "authors": "ReSound (GN Hearing)", "publisher": "ReSound US website", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (GN Hearing)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.resound.com/en-us/hearing-aids/auracast-hearing-aids", "summary": "GN's US page on Auracast in ReSound hearing aids and accessories.", "findings": [ "Names ReSound Vivia, Enzo IA, Savi and Nexia as able to join Auracast broadcasts with version 1.39 of the ReSound Smart 3D app, from \"every phone\" that is compatible with that app.", "Describes four ways to join: choosing a stream on a mobile device, through the Smart 3D app, pressing a physical button at the location, or scanning a QR code.", "Says GN brought the first hearing aid to connect to both Bluetooth LE Audio and Auracast to market, and lists a TV streamer and a remote microphone that can broadcast to nearby Auracast devices.", "Describes Auracast as able to co-exist with telecoil." ], "limitations": "An undated product page, read on 9 October 2026. It gives no firmware versions and no phone requirements for Auracast (its iPhone and iOS footnotes concern hands-free calls), and says nothing about Standard or High Quality streams.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "finding-and-joining" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-bethel-profile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-bethel-profile/", "title": "Auracast location profile: Bethel Evangelical Lutheran Church", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (Auracast website)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Case study article (Bluetooth SIG location profile)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark; the transmitters are HomeSpot products)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-profile-bethel-evangelical-lutheran-church/", "summary": "A profile of a church in Manassas, Virginia, that replaced an unused FM assistive listening system with Auracast transmitters and a pool of loaner receivers.", "findings": [ "Reports that the church's existing hearing-assist system, an ageing FM system, was used by no one: \"the equipment made people feel singled out\", and it suffered from static and dropouts, with uneven reception in the nave and choir loft.", "Describes a do-it-yourself installation by the church's AV team of two HomeSpot BA210 transmitters carrying a standard-quality and a high-quality stream, with loaner receivers of several kinds (neckband speakers, clip-on receivers, bone-conduction and over-ear headphones, wired earbuds) and direct reception by Auracast hearing aids.", "Says the team extended coverage with a transmitter and receiver pair used as a repeater, and fixed minor interference by moving the transmitter.", "Reports that some congregants heard the service clearly for the first time in years, and that the church retired its FM system entirely; it is considering speech-to-text captioning next.", "Under Benefits, the AV team reports clear reception throughout the worship space and beyond. Under Deployment, the team says its transmitter-receiver repeater extended the signal to any part of the building. These are attributed accounts without a coverage map or distances." ], "limitations": "Promotional material from the trademark owner, based on the AV team's account. No user numbers, measurements or comparison of the two systems under the same conditions; the reasons given for the FM system's lack of use are the team's view. The archived page and its HTML supply no publication date; the previously recorded 17 February 2026 could not be verified.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-movix-profile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-movix-profile/", "title": "Auracast location profile: MOVIX", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (bluetooth.com)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program page (Auracast location profile, a venue case study)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark. The equipment is Bettear's, and the profile quotes a Bettear representative)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-profile-movix/", "summary": "The trademark owner's profile of a Japanese cinema chain that added Auracast beside its infrared system at some of its multiplexes.", "findings": [ "Says MOVIX, a chain of 20 cinema complexes in Japan run by Shochiku Multiplex Theaters, introduced Auracast at select locations, including Kawaguchi, Kameari, Shimizu and Miyoshi, with Bettear CASTER transmitters installed by Eyear System; it gives location size as 1,800 to 2,500 seats per multiplex.", "States that traditional assistive technologies such as infrared \"have struggled to deliver consistent, high-quality audio\" with cinema soundtracks that mix dialogue, music, effects and deep bass.", "Says Auracast was introduced as a complement to the existing infrared system; listeners use their own compatible hearing devices, earphones or headphones, and those without Auracast use receivers that connect through neckloops or Bluetooth transmitters, which the profile says also serves cochlear implant users.", "Reports that in testing users said they could clearly hear more than 80 percent of the dialogue, that cochlear implant users experienced no audio misalignment when listening to Auracast alongside their processor microphones, and that users reported more consistent sound and better comprehension than with previous systems.", "Calls it the first permanent cinema installation of Auracast in Japan, and says the operator sees Auracast as a strong candidate for the next generation of assistive listening and a compelling alternative to infrared and hearing loops." ], "limitations": "Promotional material from the trademark owner, quoting the equipment maker. The \"more than 80 percent\" figure and the reports on delay come from unspecified user testing, with no number of users, method or comparison condition. No measurements, costs or loan figures. The page shows no date (copyright 2026).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-2026-saint-gilbert-profile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-2026-saint-gilbert-profile/", "title": "Auracast location profile: Saint Gilbert Catholic Church", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (Auracast website)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Case study article (Bluetooth SIG location profile)", "type": "News and articles", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark; the transmitters and the existing loop are both from Ampetronic | Listen Technologies)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-profile-saint-gilbert-catholic-church/", "summary": "A profile of a parish in Grayslake, Illinois, that kept its hearing loop and added Auracast transmitters in its church and chapel.", "findings": [ "Reports that the parish's existing Ampetronic hearing loop had not fully resolved listeners' difficulties, and that its performance depended on how T-coil hearing aids or receivers were positioned.", "Describes professionally designed Auri TX2N transmitters in the main church and the chapel that supplement the loop, which remains in use for current telecoil users.", "Quotes the parish's sound system caretaker as saying that Auracast coverage is even and reaches areas beyond the loop's reach.", "States that the parish had no confirmed Auracast users yet at the time of the profile.", "The profile header labels this a professional installation; the Deployment section names Thunder Hearing and Sound as the company that surveyed both spaces and designed the system." ], "limitations": "Promotional material from the trademark owner, based on the impressions of the parish's sound system caretaker. No measurements of either system, attendance denominator or observation interval. Its statement of no confirmed Auracast users does not establish zero listening. Neither the archived readable page nor its HTML establishes a publication date; the previously recorded 19 February 2026 could not be verified.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "sig-ropetackle-profile", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-ropetackle-profile/", "title": "Auracast location profile: The Ropetackle Arts Centre", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG (bluetooth.com)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program page (Auracast location profile, a venue case study)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Infrared" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-profile-the-ropetackle-arts-centre/", "summary": "The trademark owner's profile of a 200-seat UK arts centre that replaced a failing infrared system with a low-cost Auracast kit after loop quotes of about £10,000.", "findings": [ "Says the 200-seat community arts centre in Shoreham-by-Sea relied on an ageing infrared system that had begun to fail, with no replacement parts or spares, and whose limited coverage meant users had to sit in the centre of the auditorium.", "States that its primary goal was to replace the failing headphones, and that when \"quotes for traditional loop systems came in at around £10,000 GBP, the cost presented a significant barrier\".", "Reports that, on a recommendation and with advice from a contact installing Auracast in a nearby church, the centre ran a \"low-cost trial\" with a do-it-yourself kit of two broadcasters and four headphones, connected to the sound desk with XLR splitters, as a full replacement for the infrared system.", "Says volunteers needed about five minutes to learn the Auracast headphones, users preferred them to the old lanyard receivers, coverage removed the seating limits, and two patrons had connected directly through their hearing aids; it adds that awareness of Auracast among UK hearing-aid users is still growing.", "The Deployment section identifies the trial kit as two HomeSpot BA210v2 broadcasters and four headphones; headphone models are not stated." ], "limitations": "Promotional material from the trademark owner, with no price for the Auracast kit, no measurements and no account of how hearing-aid users without Auracast are served: the kit described consists of broadcasters and headphones, and the page does not mention neckloops. The loop quotes are reported second-hand, without the loop design or room details. The page shows no date (copyright 2026).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lifetime-costs", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "sig-location-profiles", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-location-profiles/", "title": "Auracast location profiles", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program page (case-study listing)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/auracast-location-profiles/", "summary": "The SIG's public page of venues that use Auracast, presented as case studies.", "findings": [ "As read, listed 40 case studies dated from May 2025 to October 2026, filterable as clinics, houses of worship, stadiums, theatres and entertainment, or universities.", "The profiles include theatres, churches, an arthouse cinema, a Japanese cinema chain, a stadium and a university, and at least eight hearing care clinics, retailers or training centres in Germany, Switzerland, South Korea and New Zealand.", "Presents the venues as \"just some\" of those using Auracast and says thousands more locations are taking it up, without listing them.", "Offers no map, no search by place and no broadcast names, so it cannot be used to find a system near a listener." ], "limitations": "A showcase chosen by the SIG, not a complete or checked directory; the case studies are promotional. The page is undated and changes as profiles are added; it was read on 9 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "sig-location-registration", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-location-registration/", "title": "Auracast location registration", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program terms", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG programme terms; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/location-registration/", "summary": "How a public location registers its Auracast broadcast with the SIG, and the trademark licence that comes with it.", "findings": [ "Asks that the broadcast be fully deployed and accessible before the location registers.", "Location staff, an affiliate or volunteer, or an installer with the location's approval can register; the form asks which transmitter product is installed.", "An accepted registration grants a royalty-free, revocable licence to use the Auracast trademarks only in connection with the registered location, which may be listed in a public database.", "The licence requires the location to keep a level of quality that meets or exceeds generally accepted industry standards for wireless audio broadcasting and any quality standards the SIG may set, and lets the SIG test, review or monitor the broadcast." ], "limitations": "Program terms can change. The terms name no specific quality standard or measurement and supply no commissioning results for an individual venue. The page is undated; the archived HTML, including its registration-role options, was checked on 13 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "commissioning-tests", "lifetime-costs", "signage-and-awareness", "installers-and-training", "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "cha-2026-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-2026-auracast/", "title": "Auracast streamed assistive listening system (resource page)", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts; it states that it accepts no donations from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/auracast/", "summary": "CHA's Auracast page: handouts, studies and statements from professionals.", "findings": [ "Quotes Dr Juliette Sterkens: it will take a decade or longer before Auracast assistive listening transmitters become commonplace, and users need a complete Auracast \"ecosystem\", not only new hearing aids.", "Quotes Dr Peter Mapp: loops and telecoils will be needed for at least 10 years, and it is too early to say whether Auracast systems will deliver what hard-of-hearing users need.", "Says it is too soon to say whether each installation can meet the ADA, partly because the international standard is not expected until late 2027, and estimates that 95% of users do not yet have hearing instruments with Auracast.", "Tracks IEC 60118-17, the coming standard for 2.4 GHz streaming assistive listening, which it says is scheduled for late 2027.", "Names its contributors with their roles, among them Peter Mapp as an assistive listening design consultant and Juliëtte Sterkens as an audiologist (AuD)." ], "limitations": "Statements of expert opinion and estimates rather than measurements.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-reach", "listener-preference", "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "sig-venue-success", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-venue-success/", "title": "Auracast venue success: 5 steps to a successful launch of Auracast at your location", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG marketing material; the SIG is an industry association funded by its member companies and owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/venue-success/", "summary": "The SIG's five-step checklist for venues that have installed Auracast: a Standard Quality stream, registration, signage, staff preparation and promotion.", "findings": [ "Step 1 asks venues to make a Standard Quality Public Broadcast Audio stream available for all audio they transmit, so that hearing aids, cochlear implants, earbuds and headphones can join.", "Step 2 asks venues to register with the SIG, which gives the right to use the Auracast trademarks and a chance of promotion, and also to register the location on Google Maps so that people searching for locations with Auracast can find it.", "Step 3 asks for clear signage: printing and posting the SIG's Auracast location graphics near entrances, counters, walls and seating areas.", "Step 4 asks venues to have staff try the Auracast receivers so that they can encourage and help visitors, to point staff to the SIG's product listing because many visitors may bring their own receivers, and to give staff \"a few simple phrases or a script\" to introduce Auracast.", "Step 5 asks venues to mention Auracast on their website, app, social media and event listings.", "The page's text does not ask venues to post the broadcast name, a QR code or a Broadcast Code; its signage step links to the same download as the Public Location Brand Guide." ], "limitations": "Promotional guidance from the trademark owner, with no evidence that the steps raise use. It does not say whether Google Maps has an attribute for Auracast. The page is undated; it was read on 9 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness", "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-taranaki-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-taranaki-auracast/", "title": "Auri Auracast at Stadium Taranaki New Zealand", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer installation account", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, co-maker of the Auri equipment described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/case-studies/stadium-taranaki-new-zealand/", "summary": "A manufacturer account of four Auracast transmitters and 32 receivers available on demand at Stadium Taranaki.", "findings": [ "Ampetronic reports four Dante-enabled Auri transmitters covering key public areas and 32 receivers available on demand.", "The installation paragraph also describes direct audio reception on personal hearing aids, earbuds and smartphones. This is the maker's account; it lists no tested device models or connection results.", "The maker says the project replaced a planned hearing loop with Auracast because the expanded stands and infrastructure made the loop installation complex." ], "limitations": "Undated manufacturer account of its own installation. No occupied coverage map, test protocol, listener sample or delay measurements. The reported design choice is one procurement example, not evidence of listener preference or a market-wide purchasing pattern. No claim that four transmitters cover the entire stadium.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "listen-birmingham-hippodrome-multistream", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-birmingham-hippodrome-multistream/", "title": "Auri Brings Reliable, Inclusive Audio to Birmingham Hippodrome", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer venue case study", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, co-maker of Auri with Ampetronic)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/case-studies/auracast-theatre-audio-system-birmingham-hippodrome/", "summary": "A theatre installation account describes selectable show audio and audio description, plus early selection difficulties.", "findings": [ "The case study dates installation to July 2025 and says the system carries touring show feeds for all performances and audio description for selected shows, selectable on loan receivers or compatible personal devices.", "It reports initial difficulties with familiarity and stream selection, addressed through staff training, documentation and careful programme naming.", "It reports fewer complaints and less maintenance time but says formal feedback is still at an early stage." ], "limitations": "Maker account with no listener count, selection-error figures, before-and-after totals or independent testing. No publication date is shown; July 2025 is the installation date. It does not describe the radio subgroup layout or quantify programme capacity.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "auri-transportation", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/auri-transportation/", "title": "Auri Transportation Applications", "authors": "Listen Technologies and Ampetronic", "publisher": "Auri", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer application page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies and Ampetronic, makers of Auri)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.auriaudio.com/applications/transportation/", "summary": "Auri’s makers identify boarding calls, gate changes and emergency announcements as transport uses for their Auracast system.", "findings": [ "The page describes sending announcements to compatible hearing aids, smartphones, earbuds or dedicated receivers through Auracast.", "It lists boarding and emergency notifications among applications and describes flexible routing and centralized management across transport facilities." ], "limitations": "Undated manufacturer marketing, not a test report. The page supplies no emergency power duration, fault-monitoring method, automatic interruption test, receiving-device takeover mechanism or evacuation results. Its application claims do not establish delivery to people who have not joined a broadcast.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "emergency-announcements" ] }, { "id": "joburg-2025-theatres-loop-tender", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/joburg-2025-theatres-loop-tender/", "title": "Bid 00370/25: Design, Supply & Installation of Audio Frequency Induction Loop Systems (AFILS) for Joburg City Theatres", "authors": "Joburg City Theatres", "publisher": "Joburg City Theatres (South African government eTender portal)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Public procurement specification", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (Joburg City Theatres, a municipal entity, specifying work at three theatres)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.etenders.gov.za/home/Download?blobName=5a9e1e63-e394-46bb-bd0d-18da175a2d45.pdf&downloadedFileName=BID00370_25+Design%2C+Supply+%26+Installation+of+Audio+Frequency+Induction+Loop+Systems+%28AFILS%29For+Joburg+City+Theatres.pdf", "summary": "A theatre procurement package requires loop test results, staff training, documentation and at least 12 months of equipment and workmanship warranty.", "findings": [ "Pages 1-2 identify bid 00370/25 and a closing date of 30 September 2025. Pages 25-27 specify auditorium and counter loops at Joburg, Soweto and Roodepoort theatres.", "Section 3.3.5 asks for at least three loop listeners for operational checks, testing with a field strength meter, commissioning reports against IEC 60118-4, and test results provided with operation and maintenance manuals.", "Section 3.4 requires design and as-built drawings, commissioning test results, staff training in operation and routine checks, heat maps, wiring diagrams, operating instructions, demonstrations and signs.", "Section 3.4 specifies a minimum 12-month warranty on all equipment and installation workmanship, while making a post-installation support proposal optional. Section 3.3.4 asks bidders to state portable-device warranties, support and replacement availability." ], "limitations": "A tender, not evidence that the systems were installed or that users benefited. No issue date is printed in the reviewed cover or scope; the closing date is not treated as publication. Scope and deliverables on pages 25-27 were read, not the entire 74-page contractual package. The equipment section contains an unsupported suggestion of neckloop coupling for hearing aids without telecoils; this is not used as compatibility evidence. It also labels a standard IEC 60118-4:2015 without clarifying the national adoption or edition. Its quantities and warranty term are project requirements, not general minima.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "procurement" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-qualification-process", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-qualification-process/", "title": "Bluetooth Qualification Process overview", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark; qualification programme overview)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/develop-with-bluetooth/qualify/", "summary": "The SIG explains who must qualify a Bluetooth product, when qualification is needed, and how to check its public listing.", "findings": [ "The opening overview describes promoting global product interoperability as a purpose of qualification; this is the SIG’s stated purpose, not a measured interoperability result.", "Says all Bluetooth products must complete qualification before they are sold or distributed; the process concerns Bluetooth specifications and the patent, copyright and trademark agreements.", "A supplier cannot qualify another company’s product on its behalf. Each company must qualify its product under its own membership account.", "A reseller that does not represent another company’s product as its own should check that the originating company completed qualification.", "Directs readers to the Qualified Product database to check completion. Product names and model numbers submitted for qualification must match those used in marketing and sales." ], "limitations": "Undated programme overview from the trademark owner, read on 13 October 2026. It supplies no results for any particular product or installation; a generic Bluetooth listing alone does not identify the Auracast role.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "samsung-2026-audio-broadcast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/samsung-2026-audio-broadcast/", "title": "Broadcast audio from your Galaxy phone", "authors": "Samsung Electronics America", "publisher": "Samsung US support", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer support page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Samsung)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS10001042/", "summary": "Samsung's instructions for sharing and receiving Auracast broadcasts on Galaxy phones, before and after the feature was renamed Audio broadcast.", "findings": [ "Samsung renamed its Auracast feature Audio Broadcast from One UI 8.5; the earlier Auracast feature is described as supported on Galaxy devices running One UI 6.1 through One UI 8.0.", "When a phone shares a broadcast, a switch labelled \"Allow hearing aids to connect\" must be turned on for hearing aid users to listen. The page does not say what the switch changes.", "Listening is described through Galaxy Buds (Buds2 Pro and newer, including Buds4 Pro) or the Listen tab of Audio broadcast, where the user picks a stream from a list. Under One UI 6.1 to 8.0 the Buds must be connected to the Galaxy Wearable app.", "Broadcasts can be protected by a password, and the feature works only with Bluetooth LE Audio devices within Bluetooth range of the phone.", "The introduction names Galaxy Buds2 Pro and Buds4 Pro as receiving examples; the older broadcast-sharing instructions also name Buds3 Pro. A recommended-article excerpt on the same page says Galaxy Buds3 and Buds3 Pro can join broadcasts. The linked article itself was not needed for that excerpt. No earbud telecoil feature is documented." ], "limitations": "An undated support page, read on 13 October 2026. It is written for sharing between a phone and earbuds; it does not list the phone models covered or describe joining a venue broadcast with hearing aids.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "finding-and-joining" ] }, { "id": "bsi-60118-17-project", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bsi-60118-17-project/", "title": "BS EN 60118-17 Ed.1.0 Electroacoustics - Hearing aids. Part 17: Assistive listening system for hearing aid users based on 2,4 GHz audio streaming", "authors": "British Standards Institution, committee EPL/29", "publisher": "BSI Standards Development", "date": "undated", "kind": "Standards project schedule", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (British Standards Institution; project source listed as IEC)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2025-00505", "summary": "The UK project page gives a scope and consultation timetable for the proposed hearing-aid broadcast standard.", "findings": [ "The project lists public comments from 22 April to 10 June 2026.", "Its scope runs from the audio input of a 2.4 GHz broadcast transmitter to audio rendered by the hearing aid, including performance measurement and transmitter coverage. The upstream audio-system design and signal conditioning are excluded.", "The displayed schedule gives start dates for drafting on 10 July 2026, comment resolution on 8 June 2027, approval on 10 August 2027 and publication on 1 November 2027. These are the page's stage-start labels, not evidence of completed stages." ], "limitations": "Undated national project page read on 13 October 2026. Its draft-start entry falls after its public-comment window. The order has not been reconciled and future entries are plans, not completed IEC stages. No draft requirements were read.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "legal-status" ] }, { "id": "bonita-2017-ramona-gym-spec", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bonita-2017-ramona-gym-spec/", "title": "BUSD Ramona Middle School Gymnasium Project AV Project", "authors": "Bonita Unified School District", "publisher": "Bonita Unified School District", "date": "undated", "kind": "School procurement specification", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Government (public school district’s audiovisual bid package)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://do.bonita.k12.ca.us/documents/Purchasing/BUSD%20Ramona%20Middle%20School%20Gymnasium%20Project%20AV%20Bid%20Package.pdf", "summary": "A gym procurement package specifies FM assistance, coverage checks and staff instruction.", "findings": [ "Item 14 requires assistive listening integrated with the audiovisual system, post-installation wireless functionality testing and additional antennas as needed for complete coverage.", "The parts list specifies an FM transmitter, receivers with ear speakers and rechargeable batteries, an external antenna suited to the gym and charging equipment.", "Item 18 requires two training sessions of at least one hour for school and district personnel." ], "limitations": "A purchasing specification, not proof of installation or listener benefit. The scope pages have no issue date; attached drawings carry a 2017 date, which is insufficient to date the whole package. The listed ear speakers do not establish neckloop provision.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "school-auditoriums" ] }, { "id": "avixa-cts-certification", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/avixa-cts-certification/", "title": "Certification Overview", "authors": "AVIXA", "publisher": "AVIXA", "date": "undated", "kind": "Professional certification programme", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (AVIXA, the audiovisual industry association that operates the credential programme)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.avixa.org/training-certification/certification", "summary": "AVIXA distinguishes general AV knowledge, system design and installation credentials.", "findings": [ "The CTS-D and CTS-I sections respectively list AV system designers and engineers, and installation technicians, system integrators and system commissioners, as examples of credential holders.", "Describes CTS as demonstrating general audiovisual tasks, including creating, implementing, supporting and servicing AV solutions.", "CTS-D covers assessing client needs, design, coordination, documentation, system verification and project closeout; CTS is required before taking the CTS-D examination.", "CTS-I covers installation, configuration, maintenance, system testing, training and project closeout documentation; CTS is required before applying for that examination.", "States that the CTS programme is ANAB-accredited to ISO 17024. The page describes broad AV credentials rather than an examination dedicated to hearing loops or Auracast." ], "limitations": "Programme overview from the credential provider, not a study of installer performance. It does not demonstrate competence with a particular assistive listening technology or document any completed venue installation. No publication date is stated; the original /certification URL redirects to /training-certification/certification.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "ohio-als-use-checklist", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ohio-als-use-checklist/", "title": "Checklist for Effective Use of Assistive Listening Systems (ALS)", "authors": "Opportunities for Ohioans with Disabilities, Accessible Ohio", "publisher": "Opportunities for Ohioans with Disabilities", "date": "undated", "kind": "Government operational guidance and checklist", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Opportunities for Ohioans with Disabilities, an Ohio state agency; Accessible Ohio programme)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/ood.ohio.gov/Accessible%20Ohio/Resources/OOD_Checklist_for_Using_ALS.pdf", "summary": "A two-page venue checklist covering routine tests, batteries, receiver distribution, repairs, staff training and signs.", "findings": [ "Asks venues to test systems regularly, microphone batteries before each use, receiver batteries before each event, and receivers before distribution (pages 1-2).", "Calls for a designated distribution point, assigned staff, a checkout and return tracking process, receiver setup with the appropriate channel and coupling device, instructions for guests and a known contact for assistance (page 2).", "Calls for maintenance protocols covering charging, testing, repairs, cleaning and battery replacement, and staff training in arranging repairs and following up missing or malfunctioning devices (pages 1-2).", "Recommends regular staff training in the installed system, device and neckloop compatibility, storage, testing, maintenance, distribution, use and disability awareness (page 2).", "Asks presenters to use microphones consistently, positions microphones close to the sound source, and connects the system directly to videos or exhibition sound sources (page 1)." ], "limitations": "Operational guidance without outcome measurements or a trial sample. No publication date appears in the PDF; its creation metadata is 26 December 2024, which is not treated as a publication date. It names FM, infrared and loops; it supplies no Auracast or Wi-Fi-specific test method.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "asha-classroom-acoustics", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/asha-classroom-acoustics/", "title": "Classroom Acoustics (Practice Portal)", "authors": "American Speech-Language-Hearing Association", "publisher": "American Speech-Language-Hearing Association", "date": "undated", "kind": "Professional practice guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (ASHA professional association; no separate funding stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.asha.org/practice-portal/professional-issues/Classroom-Acoustics/", "summary": "Professional guidance on assessing distance, noise and reverberation and improving educational listening environments.", "findings": [ "Defines critical distance as where direct and reflected sound have equal strength. Beyond it, reflections dominate as direct sound weakens.", "Defines RT60 as the time for sound to decay by 60 dB and SNR as the signal level relative to background noise. Recommends assessing both room acoustics and listener performance.", "Recommends addressing background noise, then appropriate room modifications, and repeating measurements after changes. It distinguishes helpful early reflections from later reflections that blur speech.", "Its standards list names the 2010 Part 1 edition of S12.60, reaffirmed in 2020." ], "limitations": "Educational guidance used here for the shared acoustic path, not as evidence for installing personal microphones or classroom audio distribution. No publication or update date was found in the readable article. Numeric school criteria cannot automatically be applied to other venues.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-cld1-handbook", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-cld1-handbook/", "title": "CLD1 Installation Handbook", "authors": "Ampetronic Ltd", "publisher": "Ampetronic Ltd", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer installation handbook", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic Ltd, maker of the CLD1 loop driver described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/UP15701-18-CLD-Handbook.pdf", "summary": "Counter-loop driver instructions explaining coil geometry, metal effects, cable protection and checks at the listening position.", "findings": [ "Says the counter kit is preset for desks with little or no metal; substantial metal framing or cladding may require a more powerful amplifier or a loop in the floor or ceiling in front of the counter (page 2).", "For its supplied coil, recommends a position approximately 250 mm behind the front desk edge, with the top 900-1000 mm above the floor, installed vertically or with up to half folded away from the customer. The instructions address seated and standing listeners (page 3).", "Places the driver and cables where they are protected against damage, snagging and accidental disconnection (pages 3 and 5).", "Requires a performance check with a loop receiver or field-strength meter after setup, adjusting metal-loss correction and loop current. Says not to readjust loop current once set (page 3).", "Explains that a lit loop-current indicator can coexist with no received field because of wrong loop placement or a shorted feed cable; a weak or dull signal can result from metal near the loop (page 6)." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer instructions for one driver and coil, without an independent test or listener sample. The handbook revision is UP15701-18. The declaration on page 8 is dated March 2022, but the handbook has no separate publication date; the URL directory is not treated as its date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-loop-spill", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-loop-spill/", "title": "Combating induction or hearing loop spill", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic (learning zone web page)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer design guidance", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, which makes hearing loop drivers, including the low-spill array systems the page describes, and offers a design service)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/info-centre/learning-zone/loop-spill-explained/", "summary": "A loop maker's explanation of how far a hearing loop's magnetic field spills outside the room, and of the array designs it offers to limit spill.", "findings": [ "Says the field is fairly even inside a loop but that, outside a simple rectangular perimeter loop, an audible signal can be heard as far as about four times the room's width away.", "Says the field also spreads vertically by roughly the same distance, so it can reach rooms above and below, and that two loops within each other's spill area interfere.", "Names settings where spill matters: adjacent classrooms and lecture theatres, cinemas, and venues with a performance area for electric instruments, where the loop field can interfere with electric guitars, dynamic microphones and some other equipment.", "Presents low-spill and ultra-low-spill array designs, or a cancellation loop, as the ways to contain the field, and says they are more complex to install than a perimeter loop. Its comparison is given as field plots, without measured distances." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's account, illustrated with plots from its own design tools rather than independent measurements, and promoting its own array products and design service. The page shows no date (its metadata gives first publication on 28 March 2018 and a last change on 17 January 2022).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "loop-limits", "courts-and-chambers", "healthcare-settings" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-loop-commissioning", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-loop-commissioning/", "title": "Commissioning an Induction Loop System", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic (learning zone web page)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer guidance (commissioning summary)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, which makes hearing loop drivers and loop test equipment and sells installer training)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/info-centre/learning-zone/testing-and-maintaining/commissioning/", "summary": "A loop maker's summary of the measurements it says a hearing loop must pass at commissioning against IEC 60118-4, with the target figures.", "findings": [ "Says every induction loop should be commissioned after installation against IEC 60118-4, usually by the installing engineer, to find and fix faults.", "Gives these targets: field strength of 400 mA/m (a 1 kHz sine wave) within ±3 dB over the listening area; frequency response from 100 Hz to 5 kHz within ±3 dB of the 1 kHz level across the coverage area; magnetic background noise of -32 dB or better (A-weighted).", "Says the area of use should be defined first, with measurements at both seated and standing heights where the audience may do both, and that diagrams should mark measured areas and any that fall outside the standard, for example because of interference from transformers.", "Says spill should be measured and marked on the coverage map where other loops are nearby, and that where confidentiality matters the distance at which the signal becomes inaudible should be recorded.", "Notes that speech and music typically read -9 to 0 dB (peak) on a meter rather than within ±3 dB, and says the results go on what it calls a \"Certificate of Test and Conformity\" handed to the owner with loop receivers and instructions." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's summary of a paywalled standard; the figures have not been checked here against IEC 60118-4 itself. The page shows no date (its metadata gives first publication on 5 April 2018 and a last change on 26 July 2023). It promotes Ampetronic's training courses and gives no data on how often installed loops meet these targets.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "neckloops", "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "cha-conferences", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-conferences/", "title": "Conferences and Meetings", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/place-conferences/", "summary": "Practical guidance on providing the full conference audio feed to assistive listening users, including breakout sessions.", "findings": [ "Asks for assistive listening in breakout rooms, meeting rooms, plenary sessions and workshops.", "Says video sound, presenters and audience questions must all reach the listening system, with everyone using a microphone; suggests fixed audience microphones or one or two wireless microphones with runners.", "Illustrates an FM transmitter connected to a workshop sound mixer and an FM system at a plenary session." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance and illustrative photographs, without identified venues, measured outcomes or a comparison of technologies. No publication date displayed.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-counter-systems", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-counter-systems/", "title": "Counter loop systems", "authors": "Ampetronic Ltd", "publisher": "Ampetronic Ltd", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer application guidance", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic Ltd, seller of fixed counter-loop systems)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/product-categories/systems/counter-systems/", "summary": "A loop manufacturer argues for fixed loops at routine service counters and describes narrower circumstances in which portable loops are useful.", "findings": [ "Describes counter systems as serving listeners in known, well-defined positions at ticket counters, receptions, help points and points of sale.", "Recommends fixed installations for retail counters and reception desks. Says portable units can require users to identify their hearing loss and can give frustrating experiences when misused.", "Accepts correctly used portable loops for some short conversations across desks or in meeting rooms, where the participants know the unit must be present, switched on, correctly oriented, charged and operational." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer position linked to its fixed-system range, without published comparative measurements, failure counts or a listener sample. It is not evidence of how buyers choose systems. No publication date is shown.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "gateway-2023-hearing-assistance", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/gateway-2023-hearing-assistance/", "title": "Detailed Accessibility Information About Gateway Theatre", "authors": "Gateway Theatre", "publisher": "Gateway Theatre", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue guidance (accessibility guide)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (Gateway Theatre describing access arrangements at its own venue; document funding not stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "RF/FM", "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.gatewaytheatre.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-03-GT-Access-Detailed.pdf", "summary": "Gateway Theatre's guide describes where patrons collect FM receivers and how phone users join its Wi-Fi listening service.", "findings": [ "The Hearing Assistance section, PDF page 15, describes a Williams Sound FM+ installation with both FM and Wi-Fi listening. Wearable FM receivers and earphones are available at the box office, together with two neckloops for telecoil users.", "The Wi-Fi route requires the WaveCAST Audio Receiver app and connection to the theatre's dedicated RGTHearingAssist network; the guide directs patrons to box-office staff for network access information.", "Warns that hearing assistance may be unavailable for Studio B events where performers do not use microphones, and advises checking availability for the specific performance." ], "limitations": "A statement of provision, not an equipment audit or usability study. No publication date was found in the document; the filename suggests March 2023 and its URL an April 2023 upload. The archived acquisition log records HTTP 404 for the direct URL, so the PDF was read from a Wayback Machine copy. Its statement that a neckloop translates the signal to infrared is technically mistaken; that statement is excluded from the findings. Only the title and relevant hearing-assistance section were reviewed.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "using-each-system" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-multipurpose-rooms", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-multipurpose-rooms/", "title": "Education: Hearing loops application guide — complex and multipurpose rooms", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer application guide", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, maker of the loop systems illustrated)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/UP30083-Education-AppNote-v3-interactive.pdf", "summary": "An application guide illustrates loop arrays serving divided meeting spaces and combined rooms.", "findings": [ "Printed pages 12–13 describe low-spill arrays operating independently with room dividers in place and together, in synchronisation, when the rooms are opened into one space.", "The examples include training, conferences and breakout activities. The guide says its loop drawings are indicative, not to scale and unsuitable as installation designs." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer guidance about its own products, without measured spill, intelligibility or changeover results. Only the shared meeting-room design path is used here. No publication date printed; PDF metadata says May 2023, despite the 2018 URL directory.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-metal-effects", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-metal-effects/", "title": "Effects of Metal Structures on Inductive Loop Performance", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic (learning zone web page)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer design guidance", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, which makes hearing loop drivers with metal loss correction and the array systems the page recommends, and offers a design service)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/info-centre/learning-zone/metal-structures/effects-on-loop-performance/", "summary": "A loop maker's explanation of how metal in a building weakens a hearing loop's field, makes it uneven and dulls its high frequencies, with its examples of how large the loss can be.", "findings": [ "Lists three effects of metal within the loop area: a weaker field, an uneven field across the listening plane, and losses that grow with frequency, so that sound through the loop becomes muffled and indistinct.", "Says only metal forming an electrically closed path matters, and that conductivity, not magnetism, drives the loss, so copper and aluminium cause more loss than steel.", "Gives losses as usually up to 3 dB per octave, and says a metal loss corrector is needed to restore the flat 100 Hz to 5 kHz response the loop standard requires.", "Calls a loss of more than 15 dB at 1 kHz in the centre of a perimeter loop over a reinforced concrete floor not unusual, and says losses above 25 dB at 1 kHz have been known.", "Argues that more amplifier power is no remedy: in its example, a loop needing 8 A peak without metal would need 45 A, and the field would still be uneven because the loss varies across the area; it says such rooms need special designs such as a phased array." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's page, without measured data, sites or methods behind its examples, and promoting its own correction circuits, arrays and design service. The page shows no date (its metadata gives first publication on 5 April 2018 and a last change on 30 October 2020).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-limits" ] }, { "id": "ellisys-bluetooth-comparison", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ellisys-bluetooth-comparison/", "title": "Ellisys Bluetooth analyzers comparison chart", "authors": "Ellisys", "publisher": "Ellisys", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product comparison", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ellisys, comparing its own Bluetooth analyser models)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.ellisys.com/products/btcompare.php", "summary": "A model-specific account of LE Audio capture support, spectrum analysis and optional analogue audio acquisition.", "findings": [ "The chart labels LE Audio / ISOC support Full for Bluetooth Vanguard and Partial for Bluetooth Explorer and Bluetooth Tracker. Footnote 3 defines the latter as isochronous-channel support without tZERO Tracking.", "The chart lists spectrum analysis and Audio I2S for all three models. Analogue audio acquisition is listed for all three with footnote 7 requiring the Audio Grabber accessory.", "No numerical accuracy, packet-capture error rate or calibration interval is supplied by this chart." ], "limitations": "A maker comparison of its own products, read on 13 October 2026, with no publication date. The Full and Partial labels describe the maker's feature distinction; they are not independent ratings of received audio or complete venue performance.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "santander-arena-listening-faq", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/santander-arena-listening-faq/", "title": "FAQs: assistive listening devices at Santander Arena and Santander Performing Arts Center", "authors": "Santander Arena", "publisher": "Santander Arena", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue accessibility guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (venue operator describing its own services; no external funding stated)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.santander-arena.com/plan-your-visit/faqs", "summary": "The venue offers borrowed listening receivers or the WaveCAST mobile app, with receivers collected free from the box office.", "findings": [ "The assistive-listening answer states that a receiver may be used at any seat at any performance in the arena and performing arts center, and offers the WaveCAST Receiver Mobile App as another way to listen.", "Receivers are free, distributed first come, first served from the box office near the main lobby.", "The FAQ also says public Wi-Fi is free during arena events and that visiting shows provide and control their own sound equipment." ], "limitations": "An undated service description, with no measurements of coverage, delay, network load or successful connections. It does not identify the borrowed receiver technology or stock size, and does not specify which Wi-Fi network carries the app audio. WaveCAST's network path is documented separately in the manufacturer's network guide.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "stadiums-and-arenas" ] }, { "id": "sig-in-development", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sig-in-development/", "title": "Features in development", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Specification roadmap", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/specifications-in-development/", "summary": "The SIG's overview of several key specification projects in progress.", "findings": [ "Its partial list of LE Audio projects includes extended Auracast coverage (several transmitters to cover large environments), increased Auracast capacity (several transmitters carrying more streams than one can, such as multi-language broadcasts) and a way for receivers with limited controls, such as hearing aids, to join a broadcast without another device such as a phone." ], "limitations": "One-line descriptions only; no dates or technical content for the Auracast projects. The page is undated; it was read on 9 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "large-venues", "future-proofing" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-fsm-handbook", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-fsm-handbook/", "title": "Field Strength Meter Handbook (UP14301-13)", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer instrument manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, maker of the FSM and hearing loop systems)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/wp-content/uploads/UP14301-13-HB-FSM-A5-format.pdf", "summary": "A loop-meter manual separating magnetic field, frequency response and background-noise measurements, with specifications and recalibration advice.", "findings": [ "Pages 2-4 describe a true-RMS meter with field-strength, frequency-response and background-noise modes, plus headphone monitoring. The measurement reference is 400 mA/m; the frequency-response mode compares 100 Hz, 1 kHz and 5 kHz bands using pink noise.", "Page 14 states a field-strength scale of -22 to +8 dB and an A-weighted noise scale of -42 to -12 dB, both relative to 400 mA/m. It specifies 125 ms RMS detection, field-mode response of 50 Hz to 8 kHz within ±0.25 dB, and overall gain change below 0.5 dB.", "Page 6 requires representative measurement positions and heights, taking telecoil orientation into account. The meter senses the component parallel to its coil axis; the other axes are not measured.", "Page 9 warns that the 100 Hz pink-noise reading can be unstable and asks for its peak reading. Page 11 notes that a narrow-band spill measurement needs a different scale correction, and that more detailed spill/noise work may require an audio analyser with a CMR3 probe.", "Page 12 checks the actual programme sources and comfortable, undistorted sound. Page 13 says low batteries extinguish the power indicator and leave the unit outside calibration.", "Page 15 says factory calibration is valid for one year from shipment, recommends initial recalibration after that year, and allows a longer period if no adjustments are needed.", "Pages 6-9 ask users to mark measurement points on a floor plan and record background-noise, field-strength and frequency-response results at the defined points. Each procedure names the required meter mode and test signal, providing the setup details needed to repeat a measurement." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer specifications and procedures, without independent error measurements or a complete uncertainty budget. The stated gain change and frequency-response tolerance are not a universal absolute-accuracy figure. No manual publication date is printed; March 2022 dates the declaration on page 15, not necessarily this handbook revision.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "flairmesh-multilanguage-evaluation", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/flairmesh-multilanguage-evaluation/", "title": "FlooGoo Multi-Language Auracast Evaluation Overview", "authors": "Flairmesh Technologies", "publisher": "Flairmesh Technologies", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer evaluation instructions", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Flairmesh Technologies, maker of the documented devices)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.flairmesh.com/support/FlooGooMultiLanguageAuracast.pdf", "summary": "Evaluation firmware for three language broadcasts from a FlooGoo device.", "findings": [ "Pages 2-3 describe special evaluation firmware for FMB120, FMA120 and FMA121, with three language broadcasts labelled eng, deu and fra; those suffixes are added automatically to the broadcast name.", "The setup requires public broadcast enabled and the high-quality music option disabled. PDF pages 5-6 describe Windows recognising a four-channel output, with its first three channels routed to the three language broadcasts.", "PDF page 7 says the full release allows selection of three languages and configuration of each broadcast name." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer instructions for evaluation firmware, without independent tests, receiver compatibility results or venue measurements. It does not document the BIG/subgroup arrangement. Copyright 2023-2025 is not a publication date. Used only as evidence of a shared multichannel transmission path, not conference interpretation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "cha-fm-ir-troubleshooting", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-fm-ir-troubleshooting/", "title": "FM and IR Assistive Listening Systems-FAQ and Troubleshooting", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy troubleshooting guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, a hearing-access advocacy organisation)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/fm-ir-faq-troubleshooting/", "summary": "Practical advice about borrowing FM and infrared receivers, choosing attachments, and seeking help when reception fails.", "findings": [ "The introduction suggests feedback to staff, a public review or a formal complaint when troubleshooting still leaves the listener without clear sound, and links to advocacy templates. These are proposed follow-up routes, not documented complaint outcomes.", "General (Consumers) includes questions about drawing attention to hearing loss and whether borrowed earbuds are sanitary. It suggests dark clothing to reduce equipment contrast and personal wired headphones as one alternative to borrowed ear attachments; it supplies no hygiene measurements.", "Sound Problems (Consumers) includes separate questions about lip-sync mismatch and echo, directing listeners to management for troubleshooting. These identify concerns, without quantifying delay.", "Under Sound Problems, the no-sound answer recommends staff sound checks before every event using a receiver and headphones. The buzzing answer suggests exchanging a faulty receiver, asking the operator about a busy FM channel, and considering electromagnetic interference at the neckloop.", "Advises checking the venue's information, confirming that receivers and neckloops work, and allowing time to collect and test equipment. Describes reluctance to ask for equipment or make hearing loss visible, without giving a survey sample.", "For no sound, suggests exchanging the receiver in case of dead batteries and asking staff to check that the transmitter is connected and on. Listeners unsure about the correct channel should ask staff.", "For intermittent infrared reception, recommends locating the emitter and moving the receiver higher and towards it so people, seats or belongings do not obstruct it.", "Advises providing a pre-event audio test, because listeners otherwise have to wait until the event starts to discover whether the system works and may then be reluctant to seek help.", "Suggests headphones as an alternative for people who find single-ear attachments cumbersome, and notes that listeners can bring wired headphones with a 3.5 mm plug." ], "limitations": "Undated advocacy advice, not a measured trial. Its categorical statements about borrowing and latency are not used as universal technical claims: personal compatible receivers exist, and the page gives no delay measurements. Legal assertions on the page were not evaluated for this record.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "using-each-system", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "iggh-operator-checks", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iggh-operator-checks/", "title": "Für Anlagenbetreibende", "authors": "IGGH (Höranlagenverzeichnis)", "publisher": "IGGH (Swiss hearing-system directory)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue guidance on system checks", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (IGGH hearing-system directory; the page acknowledges financial supporters and gives no separate funding for the guidance)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://hoeranlagen.ch/faq/index.php?zid=2", "summary": "Swiss directory guidance distinguishes free listener checks, paid specialist help and routine checks by venue staff.", "findings": [ "Describes independent, free hearing-system checks arranged through a regional Pro Audito association, assessing whether audio from microphones and other sources is clearly transmitted.", "Separately directs operators to hearing-system specialists for problems and new installations, saying planning, installation and commissioning need experience; specialists work independently and charge directly.", "For a routine loop check, recommends an upright receiver at ear height, normal microphone use, listening at several positions without changing receiver volume, and noting reception on a room plan.", "Recommends also asking a person with hearing loss to listen through a hearing aid or implant telecoil, since that person may experience background noise differently from someone using a monitor and headphones." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance, not a technical acceptance protocol or a legal source. Its summaries of Swiss rules are not used here. The linked specialist list was not reviewed. No publication date is stated; the listener FAQ was also archived as context.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "mn-2026-accessible-arts-awards", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/mn-2026-accessible-arts-awards/", "title": "FY 2026 Grantees: Accessible Arts", "authors": "Minnesota State Arts Board", "publisher": "Minnesota State Arts Board", "date": "undated", "kind": "Programme award list (state government)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Minnesota State Arts Board)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.arts.state.mn.us/grants/2026/2026-awarded-accessible-arts.htm", "summary": "Minnesota’s fiscal-year 2026 Accessible Arts awards include hearing-assistance repairs and devices within broader accessibility projects.", "findings": [ "The FY 2026 pilot programme lists 21 grants totalling US$390,615. It supports lasting accessibility improvements through training, consultants, audits and plans, and small physical or equipment investments costing less than US$5,000.", "History Theatre’s US$18,664 award includes replacing nonfunctioning hearing-assistance components alongside an access plan and website changes.", "Open Eye Theatre’s US$19,980 award includes assistive listening devices alongside digital and projected-text access measures. Rochester Repertory’s US$16,551 project combines listening devices with an accessibility audit.", "Weisman Art Museum’s US$20,000 award combines image descriptions for its digital collection with listening equipment for gallery tours." ], "limitations": "The page identifies fiscal year 2026 but gives no publication date or current application deadline. Award totals cover mixed projects and must not be read as equipment prices; the less-than-US$5,000 equipment provision is distinct from the larger total project awards. No device models or completed-project measurements are given.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "funding-and-grants" ] }, { "id": "sydney-opera-house-hearing", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sydney-opera-house-hearing/", "title": "Hearing (accessibility page)", "authors": "Sydney Opera House", "publisher": "Sydney Opera House", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue guidance (operator's page for patrons)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (the Sydney Opera House, writing for its own audiences about the systems it runs)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.sydneyoperahouse.com/visit/accessibility/hearing", "summary": "The Sydney Opera House's page on the hearing services in its venues, which now offer both Auracast and hearing loops.", "findings": [ "States that Auracast is installed in all venues with full venue coverage, that receivers can be collected from the cloakroom with headphones or a personal induction loop, and that Auracast-enabled hearing devices can connect directly.", "Describes hearing loops that telecoil users connect to directly, and lists their coverage by venue: full in the Playhouse, all rows except the front row of the Joan Sutherland Theatre stalls, and several front rows and sections excluded in the Drama Theatre and Concert Hall.", "Thanks a donor for funding upgrades to the induction loops in the Drama Theatre and the Joan Sutherland Theatre.", "Its venue-coverage section lists six loop venues, including the Utzon Room and the Centre for Creativity." ], "limitations": "A venue information page with no measurements, user numbers or costs. The page shows no date.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-and-auracast", "theatres-and-cinemas" ] }, { "id": "cha-loop-troubleshooting", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-loop-troubleshooting/", "title": "Hearing Loops: Basic Troubleshooting", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access (The John G. Shedd Institute)", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy guidance page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an advocacy and education initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/hearing-loops-troubleshooting/", "summary": "A US loop advocacy group's routine checks and first troubleshooting steps for venues that run hearing loops.", "findings": [ "Under Common Troubleshooting (for Facilities), a question about a slight echo directs the reader to a knowledgeable loop installer. The answer's assertion of no delay supplies no measurements; the question establishes a troubleshooting topic, not a latency result.", "Sets a frontline staff check with a loop receiver and headphones, calling it \"good practice to test weekly and verify during a microphone test before every event\", and warns that a test just before an event may be too late to fix a fault.", "Sets a monthly check by AV staff with a loop tester, noting that one maker's tester shows green when a loop meets the IEC 60118-4 level requirement and yellow when it works but falls short.", "Lists faults to check first (driver unplugged or off, cables from the mixer or to the loop disconnected, mixer settings changed), says buzzing comes from electromagnetic interference rather than the loop, and attributes a signal heard only near the walls to a perimeter loop where a phased array was needed.", "Says consumers meet hearing loops that are not working, which denies them communication access required under the ADA, and refers faults that persist to an installer." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance with no data on how often loops fail, and no interval for a professional re-test against IEC 60118-4. The page shows no date (its metadata gives first publication on 22 February 2024 and a last change on 15 August 2026).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "loop-verification", "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "cha-loop-installation", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-loop-installation/", "title": "Hearing Loops: Installations", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access (The John G. Shedd Institute)", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy guidance page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, a 501(c)(3) advocacy and education initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts, founded in 2024, whose website succeeded hearingloop.org; it states that it accepts no donations from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/biz-hearing-loop-installation/", "summary": "A US loop advocacy group's guidance to venues on getting a hearing loop installed and commissioned to IEC 60118-4.", "findings": [ "Under Steps to Help Ensure Quality Hearing Loops Installations, recommends obtaining at least two bids to compare price, terms and standards.", "Says every hearing loop, installed or portable, should meet IEC 60118-4, which it describes as giving strong, even coverage without interference wherever a listener sits.", "Advises venues to get at least two bids and to expect an on-site visit, with the installer explaining the on-site test results and which loop type (perimeter, figure-of-eight or phased array) the building needs; it says a loop should never be installed purely from a computer simulation.", "States that IEC 60118-4 requires, as the final commissioning test, that a hearing aid user familiar with loops confirm on site that the signal is even, clear and low in magnetic background noise, and notes that staff without a telecoil cannot judge this the same way.", "Advises installing during a remodel, new build or flooring replacement to cut cost, and asks installers for documentation that the loop meets IEC 60118-4, a design diagram, warranties, maintenance agreements and regular staff training." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance without data on installation quality or on how often loops meet the standard. The statement about the standard's final listening test has not been checked here against the paywalled text. The page shows no date (its metadata gives first publication on 13 November 2024 and a last change on 16 May 2026).", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "commissioning-tests", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "lifetime-costs", "procurement" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-metal-loss-test", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-metal-loss-test/", "title": "HLS-2D Metal Loss Test Procedure (document UP17940-4)", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer test procedure", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic; the procedure is written for its own HLS-2D test driver, field strength meters, design software and loop drivers)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/UP17940-4-HLS-2D_Metal_Loss_Test_Procedure.pdf", "summary": "A loop maker's site-survey procedure for measuring how much a building's metal weakens a hearing loop's field, with its rules for choosing a perimeter loop or an array.", "findings": [ "Describes a pre-design site test: a temporary test loop is driven at a known current, and field strength, frequency response (100 Hz, 1 kHz, 5 kHz) and magnetic background noise are read at 1.2 m above the floor, at least 1 m from the wire, across the structural elements of the area.", "Treats a perimeter loop as suitable when no spill control is needed and the highest and lowest readings differ by less than 6 dB; with more than 6 dB of variation it says a perimeter loop could not meet IEC 60118-4 and recommends testing a figure-of-eight array with segments 2 to 4 m wide.", "Where spill must be controlled for confidentiality or because of adjacent spaces, it limits array segments to 2.0 to 2.5 m wide; it adds that a floor-level perimeter loop wider than 15 m in its narrower dimension varies by more than 6 dB even with no metal present, and that elevating the loop or using its MultiLoop array system corrects this.", "Says its network drivers can correct metal loss by up to 4 dB per octave (enough for a 5 kHz reading down to -9 dB relative to 1 kHz) at the cost of up to 4 dB more voltage headroom, that metal loss is usually greatest in the middle of a perimeter loop, and that if the loss slope varies by more than about 3 dB between test points, smaller loop segments may be needed." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer's procedure built around its own products and design software; the thresholds are its rules of thumb, not independently validated, and the document gives no data on typical metal loss in buildings. It prints no publication date; its declaration-of-conformity page is dated March 2022.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "which-technology", "loop-verification", "loop-limits" ] }, { "id": "iggh-hearing-system-checks", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iggh-hearing-system-checks/", "title": "Höranlagen-Testende werden", "authors": "IGGH (Höranlagenverzeichnis)", "publisher": "IGGH (Swiss hearing-system directory)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Listener tester programme", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (IGGH hearing-system directory; the page acknowledges financial supporters but does not identify separate funding for tester training)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://hoeranlagen.ch/testende.php", "summary": "The Swiss hearing-system directory recruits people who use hearing devices to test systems and share experience in workshops.", "findings": [ "Invites people who use hearing devices and have an experienced ear to test and assess hearing systems from a user’s perspective.", "The role includes feedback based on personal experience and needs, and participation in workshops to share knowledge and shape standards.", "Describes visiting buildings in Switzerland and flexible participation; it does not describe an installer licence, technical examination or commissioning credential." ], "limitations": "A recruitment page for user testing, with no published test protocol, examination threshold or data linking workshops to better installations. No publication date is stated. It supports a distinction between listener checks and technical commissioning, not a claim of national installer accreditation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "hlaa-washington-2018-arts-checkup", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hlaa-washington-2018-arts-checkup/", "title": "How hearing-friendly is your arts program?", "authors": "Hearing Loss Association of America, Washington State Association; Loop Washington", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America, Washington State Association; hosted by Loop Seattle", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy venue self-assessment checklist", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Hearing Loss Association of America, Washington State Association, and Loop Washington; both logos appear on the checklist)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://loopseattle.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/arts-hearing-friendly-check-up-2018-w-new-logos.pdf", "summary": "An arts-venue checklist asking whether staff can operate, test, lend and maintain listening equipment and tell patrons about it.", "findings": [ "Asks whether signs can be seen at entrances and information points, and whether hearing-access information appears in venue publicity.", "Asks whether all staff understand the listening system, can troubleshoot it, can issue and maintain headsets and neckloops, and can explain their use to patrons.", "Asks about regular system testing, repair contacts and protocols for charging, replacing batteries, testing, repairing and cleaning loan equipment.", "Asks whether staff, presenters and performers use microphones each time and repeat audience questions." ], "limitations": "An advocacy checklist, not an audit of actual venues. No printed publication date; the filename and PDF creation metadata point to 2018, but no publication day is established. Only the assistive listening and microphone provisions are used; the wider document also covers visual access outside this question’s scope. Unreferenced prevalence figures are not used.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "oticon-2026-auracast-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/oticon-2026-auracast-guide/", "title": "How to listen to an Auracast broadcast", "authors": "Oticon (Demant)", "publisher": "Oticon support website", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer support page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Demant / Oticon)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.oticon.com/support/life-with-a-hearing-aid/connecting-to-other-devices/how-to-listen-to-auracast-broadcasts-with-hearing-aids", "summary": "Oticon's step-by-step guide to joining Auracast broadcasts through its Companion app or through Android's own settings.", "findings": [ "Says Oticon Companion hearing aids with Bluetooth LE Audio support can be used with Auracast. The in-app assistant supports Android 10 and later and iOS 15.2 and later.", "The app offers two ways in: scanning a QR code (in the app or with the phone camera) or choosing from a list of nearby broadcasts, with a password prompt for protected broadcasts.", "On select Android phones with LE Audio running Android 15 or later, the phone's own settings can be used instead; phone makers give the feature different names.", "The native-settings section identifies its screenshots as Google Pixel 9 examples and cautions that other phones may show different menus. It describes both QR-code joining and choosing a nearby stream after the hearing aids are connected over Bluetooth.", "Before you start asks users to have the latest Companion app and pair the hearing aids with the phone. In the app's QR-code instructions, step 6 says joining starts audio streaming directly to the hearing aids.", "Troubleshooting: location access must be on for the phone to detect nearby broadcasts, and if a broadcast is visible but will not connect, the user should try the Companion app. The page calls Auracast a new and emerging technology with which users may experience issues.", "Step 7 of both Companion joining options describes a volume slider, a streaming equalizer for frequency balance, and a broadcast mute button. The Before you start section asks for the latest Companion app and hearing aids paired with the phone or device.", "Both Companion joining options use Sound, the three-dot menu and the Auracast broadcast screen. Neither option instructs the listener to create an ordinary listening programme. The native Android section also explains disconnecting through the Audio stream notification." ], "limitations": "An undated support page, rechecked from the archived original on 13 October 2026. It does not list hearing aid models or firmware versions, and does not address Standard versus High Quality streams.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "finding-and-joining", "using-each-system", "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "cha-borrowed-equipment", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-borrowed-equipment/", "title": "How to Use Borrowed Assistive Listening System Equipment", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy instructions for listeners", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, a hearing-access advocacy organisation)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/how-use-borrowed-equipment-site/", "summary": "A listener guide separates direct telecoil use of a room loop from using a borrowed receiver with headphones or a neckloop.", "findings": [ "For a room loop, users of hearing aids or cochlear implants with telecoils select their telecoil programme without collecting extra equipment. Other listeners can borrow a loop receiver and headphones.", "For FM/RF and infrared, telecoil users borrow a receiver and neckloop and select their telecoil programme. People without hearing aids or without a telecoil programme use a receiver and headphones.", "Listeners may bring wired headphones with a 3.5 mm plug for use with the borrowed receiver." ], "limitations": "Undated instructions without user testing. Legal statements about equipment quantities and charges were not evaluated. Linked videos were not viewed; findings come from the page's written instructions.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "using-each-system" ] }, { "id": "iec-60118-17", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iec-60118-17/", "title": "IEC 60118-17 (in preparation): assistive listening system for hearing aid users based on 2.4 GHz audio streaming", "authors": "IEC TC 29 WG 13", "publisher": "International Electrotechnical Commission", "date": "undated", "kind": "Standard in preparation", "type": "Standards and specifications", "funding": "Standards body (International Electrotechnical Commission)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://tc29.iec.ch/tc-activity/standards-under-preparation/", "summary": "The coming IEC standard for assistive listening systems that broadcast streaming audio to hearing aids in the 2.4 GHz ISM band.", "findings": [ "Scope covers hearing aids as receivers, the properties of the broadcast transmitters, methods to verify that the system performs properly, and a method to measure a transmitter's coverage.", "Applies to single-transmitter systems only.", "Will specify the average and peak audio signal levels to be transmitted for hearing aid purposes.", "The TC 29 page lists the project with the date November 2027; the page does not say what the date marks." ], "limitations": "Scope text only; draft content and limits are not public. The page is undated; its private copy fetched on 13 October 2026 was checked for the timeline audit on that date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "real-range", "device-compatibility", "legal-status", "signal-target", "audio-level", "which-technology", "large-venues", "commissioning-tests", "future-proofing", "loop-and-auracast" ] }, { "id": "cha-2026-infrared", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-2026-infrared/", "title": "Infrared (IR) Assistive Listening Systems", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access, The John G. Shedd Institute", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts; it states that it accepts no donations from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/infrared/", "summary": "A user-advocacy page on infrared systems: how they work, where emitters go, matching neckloops to receivers, and the advantages and limitations for users and operators.", "findings": [ "Says infrared is line of sight, cannot be used outdoors in daytime, and is unsuitable for venues with much glass or glossy surfaces in sunlight and for walk-up or walk-through locations.", "Lists as advantages clearer listening indoors, several audio streams, relatively simple installation, and privacy because the signal does not pass through walls.", "Lists user limitations: users \"lose dignity by “outing” their disability\", borrowing and returning is inconvenient, borrowed equipment can fail, neckloops are sometimes weak, and people who cannot work out the system may stay home.", "Lists operator limitations: receivers for every user, batteries to replace or recharge, staff time to issue, explain, retrieve and maintain receivers (with hygiene concerns), and building electrical interference heard as a buzz by telecoil users.", "Advises ordering neckloops from the receiver's maker, because a mismatched neckloop can be too weak for the telecoil and distort when the volume is turned up." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance without measurements or references. The page shows no author or date; its metadata gives first publication on 19 February 2024 and a last change on 27 April 2026. Its publisher's quick guide states that consumers prefer hearing loops.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "which-technology", "loan-receivers", "listener-preference", "infrared-limits", "lifetime-costs", "neckloops" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-installer-training", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-installer-training/", "title": "Installation and support", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer training and support page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, which makes and sells hearing loop equipment and supplies the training)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/installation-and-support/", "summary": "Ampetronic describes installer training from assistive listening principles through loop commissioning and fault finding.", "findings": [ "The manufacturer describes installer training covering assistive listening principles, installation, commissioning and troubleshooting of hearing loops.", "Offers courses in person and online through Loopworks, many described as free, alongside installation advice and technical support.", "Lists instructional videos on metal-loss tests, low-spill loop installation, area and counter-loop commissioning, and its measurement tools." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer’s description of its own training and support. The public page gives no assessment rubric, pass rate, renewal requirements or independent comparison of installation outcomes. Linked videos and account-only courses were not reviewed. No publication date is stated.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "finland-ym-loop-symbol", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/finland-ym-loop-symbol/", "title": "International induction loop symbol (Accessibility Glossary, concept c27)", "authors": "Ministry of the Environment (Finland), with Sanastokeskus (the Finnish Terminology Centre)", "publisher": "Suomi.fi Interoperability Platform (Digital and Population Data Services Agency, Finland)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Government guidance (entry in a built-environment accessibility glossary, in Finnish, Swedish and English)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Government (Finnish Ministry of the Environment, as part of its built-environment vocabulary projects)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://sanastot.suomi.fi/en/terminology/esteettomyys/concept/c27", "summary": "The Finnish Ministry of the Environment's glossary entry for the sign that marks a space or service point with an induction loop, linked to an entry for loop coverage maps.", "findings": [ "Defines the international induction loop symbol as the mark that identifies a space or service point equipped with an induction loop; its English synonyms include hearing loop symbol.", "States that the symbol is defined in the international standard SFS-EN 60118-4, the European adoption of the loop performance standard IEC 60118-4.", "States that a space with an induction loop should also have a coverage map. The linked entry defines it as a sign that marks the loop's coverage area on the floor plan, so that a hearing device user can choose the best place to listen.", "Files both entries under signs, in a glossary that covers accessibility from the point of view of built-environment legislation." ], "limitations": "A glossary entry, not a regulation: it does not name the legal source for the coverage map. The Finnish text was translated for this record. IEC 60118-4 itself is paywalled; its public contents page lists an informative Annex C on the information to provide, with a Figure C.1, \"Graphical symbol: inductive coupling\", which could not be viewed. The entry shows no date; page metadata records creation on 12 May 2022 and a change on 3 April 2024.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "signage-and-awareness" ] }, { "id": "iscve-registered-installers", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/iscve-registered-installers/", "title": "ISCVE Registered Installers", "authors": "ISCVE", "publisher": "Institute of Sound, Communications and Visual Engineers (UK)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Program page (installer membership scheme)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (ISCVE, which charges membership fees and operates the directory)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://iscve.org.uk/iscve-registered-installers/", "summary": "ISCVE describes a general installer membership scheme with directory entries and technical support.", "findings": [ "The scheme is open to companies using ISCVE members as installation engineers and to ISCVE members installing as sole entities.", "Benefits include a directory entry, technical advice and access to discounted training; the directory can be searched by specialist skills, services and location.", "Premium membership adds greater prominence in the directory and more case studies; the page describes these as membership benefits.", "The published membership criteria concern technical change, standards and engagement with the institute; this page does not set a hearing-loop measurement examination or require a test of every installation." ], "limitations": "A paid general sound and audiovisual membership scheme, distinct from the institute’s Hearing Loop Assessment Scheme. Directory prominence does not measure hearing-loop performance. The page displays a 4 March 2025 last-change timestamp and dated FAQ entries, without a clearly identified publication date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "uq-listening-systems", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/uq-listening-systems/", "title": "Listening systems for hearing impaired people", "authors": "University of Queensland", "publisher": "University of Queensland, my.UQ", "date": "undated", "kind": "University service guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (University of Queensland describes its own teaching-space services)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://my.uq.edu.au/node/2178", "summary": "University guidance listing infrared and Auracast provision, broadcast identifiers and semester-long receiver loans.", "findings": [ "The Borrowing an IR receiver section explicitly describes the loan as free and lasting a semester. The Auracast broadcast systems section allows listeners to provide their own compatible device or borrow a receiver.", "The university identifies infrared and Auracast as its two main teaching-space listening systems and says its IR receivers work with all IR systems used in its lecture theatres.", "Auracast is enabled in St Lucia rooms seating 300 or more and selected other spaces. A room list gives broadcast identifiers, with building-room naming explained below it.", "Both infrared and Auracast receivers can be borrowed for a semester from the Central Library AskUs desk. Auracast borrowers are asked to bring headphones with a 3.5 mm cable; the receiver instructions also describe connecting a neckloop.", "The Auracast loan-receiver instructions describe scanning for broadcasts and switching between nearby broadcasts. The page links students to disability services." ], "limitations": "Undated operational guidance read on 13 October 2026. Availability and instructions are university statements, with no occupied-room coverage, delay, speech-understanding or user-study results. Generic phone and hearing-device instructions are not an independently tested compatibility list; no inference that ordinary Bluetooth devices support Auracast is made.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lecture-halls" ] }, { "id": "listen-listenwifi-server-audio-spec", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/listen-listenwifi-server-audio-spec/", "title": "ListenWIFI 4 Channel Wi-Fi Audio Server (NEW)", "authors": "Listen Technologies", "publisher": "Listen Technologies", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product specification", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Listen Technologies, maker of the ListenWIFI server described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.listentech.com/shop/product/listenwifi-4-channel-wi-fi-audio-server-new/", "summary": "The maker lists audio specifications and network data requirements for its LW-215-04 ListenWIFI server.", "findings": [ "Lists system frequency response as 20 Hz-20 kHz ±1 dB, total harmonic distortion below 1% and signal-to-noise ratio above 74 dB, each at nominal level.", "Lists 16-bit, 48 kHz sampling and 125 kbps of audio bandwidth per listening device, with unicast RTP, UDP and HTTPS transport protocols.", "The page does not identify the live audio codec or explain whether the stated 125 kbps includes packet overhead.", "Lists system delay as 40-60 ms depending on network, traffic, quality-of-service settings and listening device." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer specifications without independent measurements, a named test receiver or headphones, or full test conditions. The network data figure does not establish an encoded codec payload rate. Page undated; read on 13 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "sound-quality" ] }, { "id": "univox-loop-configurations", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/univox-loop-configurations/", "title": "Loop Configurations Explained: why one size does not fit all", "authors": "UnivoxAudio Ltd", "publisher": "UnivoxAudio (knowledge centre wiki)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer design guidance (distributor's knowledge centre)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (UnivoxAudio Ltd, the UK and Ireland distributor of the Swedish loop maker Bo Edin's Univox amplifiers and SuperLoop systems, which the page describes and sells)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.univoxaudio.co.uk/knowledge-centre-wiki/a-guide-to-induction-loops/loop-configurations", "summary": "A loop distributor's guide to perimeter, cancellation, figure-of-eight and array loops, with its rules of thumb on how far a loop's field spills and how metal in floors limits a simple loop's width.", "findings": [ "Says a perimeter loop is the easiest and, where it works, cheapest layout, but that large areas, spill control or metal loss can rarely be handled with one.", "Warns never to install a perimeter loop at listening height: in its example, 0.25 m vertically from the loop, the field was about -1 dB at the centre of the room and over +9 dB at the edge, outside the standard's tolerance; the further the loop is from the listening plane, the more even the field.", "Gives the widest floor-level perimeter loop as about 22 m for seated listeners (listening plane 1.2 m) and 26 m for standing listeners (1.7 m) with no metal; over standard reinforced concrete 6-10 m (5-9 m standing), heavy reinforced concrete 3-6 m (2-5 m), a metal system floor or steel deck 1-3 m (2-3 m), and under a glass or metal suspended ceiling 3 m.", "Says a perimeter loop's spill field extends one to two times its width, with a signal above -32 dB (the background noise level it treats as the limit) still present there, so a 5 m loop may still radiate above that level 5-10 m away.", "Says metal loss correction flattens the response at only one point, so in larger loops some areas stay under-corrected and others over-corrected; where the field varies by more than 6 dB, smaller multiple loops are needed. Moving the loop away from the metal, for example to ceiling level, is offered as another remedy.", "Describes a cancellation loop as a simple, relatively low-cost way to cut spill in one or two directions, at the price of part of the room lacking full coverage." ], "limitations": "A distributor's guide based on its own design tools and products, with field plots but no measured sites or data behind its width table and spill figures. The page shows no date; it refers to IEC 60118-4:2006, since replaced by the 2014 edition, and the site footer gives copyright 2012.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "loop-limits" ] }, { "id": "univox-loop-standard-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/univox-loop-standard-guide/", "title": "Loop Performance Standard IEC 60118-4:2006", "authors": "UnivoxAudio Ltd", "publisher": "UnivoxAudio (knowledge centre wiki)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer guidance (distributor's summary of the loop standard)", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (UnivoxAudio Ltd, the UK and Ireland distributor of the Swedish loop maker Bo Edin's Univox loop amplifiers)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.univoxaudio.co.uk/knowledge-centre-wiki/standards-legislation-and-best-practice/standard-iec-60118-4-2006", "summary": "A loop distributor's plain-language summary of the loop performance standard, with its advice on signage, staff training and routine checks and its account of why installed loops stop working unnoticed.", "findings": [ "Summarises the standard's targets as 400 mA/m at listening height within ±3 dB across the listening plane, and a frequency response within ±3 dB of the 1 kHz level from 100 Hz to 5 kHz; it says the tolerance is relaxed for counter loops to a total variation of 9 dB, while the standard does not define the usable listening volume.", "Gives the background magnetic noise as ideally no worse than -47 dB(A), with -32 dB(A) acceptable; between -22 and -32 dB it says the noise should be investigated before a loop is installed, since it may fall outside the hearing aid's range or come from an electrical fault.", "States that well-designed, professionally installed loops rarely break down but all too often do not work well or at all, because they are switched off, microphones are moved, covered or unplugged, amplifier controls are adjusted, or the loop is cut or disconnected, and that nobody notices because only hearing aid users listen to the system.", "Recommends that staff check loops with a loop receiver monthly and before any event, and that systems be inspected and tested with a field strength meter against the standard.", "Lists what customer-facing staff should know: what a loop is, which areas it covers, how to switch it on and check it, and what to do if it fails.", "In the same passage on counter loops, it says the standard allows a total variation of field strength of 9 dB in the listening volume and \"does not define the useable listening volume\".", "In the frequency-response section, warns that a loop listener alone is difficult to use to judge frequency response without experience, and that sound judged acceptable by the checker may still be inadequate for a listener with hearing loss." ], "limitations": "A distributor's summary, not the standard: it describes the superseded 2006 edition, and its figures have not been checked here against the paywalled text. It gives no data on how often loops fail. The page shows no date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "service-counters", "loop-verification", "loop-limits", "loop-and-auracast", "signage-and-awareness", "courts-and-chambers", "portable-and-counter-loops" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-loopworks-r2", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-loopworks-r2/", "title": "Loopworks Measure R2 field strength meter", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product documentation", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, maker of Loopworks Measure and the R2 receiver)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/products/loopworks-measure-receiver-field-strength-meter-r2/", "summary": "Describes an iOS measurement app that requires an external telecoil receiver, with calibration steps and stated frequency-response and gain-stability specifications.", "findings": [ "The page states that the app runs on iOS 15 or later and supports the R2 through official Apple Lightning-to-3.5 mm and USB-C-to-3.5 mm adapters.", "The page specifies response within ±0.25 dB from 50 Hz to 8 kHz, gain stability better than ±0.25 dB, and RMS detection with a 125 ms integration time supplied by the host device and app. It states a 400 mA/m field-strength reference.", "The linked User Guide UP18304-07, page 6, says an R2 receiver containing a telecoil is required for any measurements, and instructs users to calibrate the receiver against the iOS device settings. Page 8 allows reviewing calibration results and recalibrating regularly or after changing the receiver.", "The guide, pages 6-7, distinguishes simple meter operation without an account from saved data, audio recordings and guided tests requiring an account. Meter functions cover field strength, frequency response and A-weighted magnetic background noise.", "The product page describes its combined app and receiver as the most accurate dedicated field-strength meter available, but supplies no comparative test results supporting that ranking." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer claims; no independent comparison or full end-to-end measurement uncertainty is reported. Frequency-response flatness and gain stability do not establish total absolute field-strength accuracy. Also read the linked 35-page guide at https://www.ampetronic.com/wp-content/uploads/UP18304-07-R2_loopworks-measure-user_manual.pdf; its cover gives copyright 2015-2026 without a publication date. Hardware and platform claims describe the page read on 13 October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "sennheiser-mobileconnect-app-page", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sennheiser-mobileconnect-app-page/", "title": "MobileConnect App for Audience Engagement", "authors": "Sennheiser", "publisher": "Sennheiser (product page)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sennheiser, maker of the MobileConnect Wi-Fi system)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.sennheiser.com/en-us/catalog/applications/assistive-listening-and-audience-engagement/mobileconnect-app-223344/mobileconnect-app-product-123456", "summary": "Sennheiser's product page for the MobileConnect app, through which listeners receive a venue's Wi-Fi audio streams on their own phones and can speak back through a talk-back microphone.", "findings": [ "Says listeners enjoy hearing assistance \"via Unicast audio stream with latency as low as 25 ms, depending on the network and device used\".", "Its feature list gives \"Unicast audio streaming between 40-60ms latency, dependent on network and user devices\", and separately \"Audience Mic latency as little as 25ms\" for the talk-back microphone.", "Lists assistive and personal listening over an existing Wi-Fi network, using listeners' own iOS and Android devices, and says listeners can enjoy clear audio \"anywhere in the room\"." ], "limitations": "A maker's marketing page with no method, phones, network load or listening path behind either figure; the 25 ms in the text may refer to the talk-back microphone, as the feature list states. The page carries no date. Sennheiser's data sheet gives 40-60 ms on average for the app.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "cha-museums", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-museums/", "title": "Museums", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, a hearing-access organisation)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/place-museums/", "summary": "Museum guidance distinguishes counter loops, fixed listening areas, mobile FM tours and handheld audio guides.", "findings": [ "Recommends built-in counter loops at entry, ticket, sales and customer-service points, and installed loops or FM for spaces with an audio feed.", "For guided tours, recommends mobile FM receivers with headphones or neckloops for visitors whose hearing aids or cochlear implants have telecoils; also identifies neckloops for handheld audio tours.", "Describes separate exhibit loops at the Statue of Liberty Museum, intended to let telecoil users move between exhibits and hear the relevant playback without borrowing equipment; links to an installation account.", "Points venues to guidance on describing and promoting their listening systems." ], "limitations": "Advocacy guidance and selected installation examples, not an independent audit or a comparison trial. The exhibit account comes from linked installation coverage; no coverage maps, interference measurements or visitor sample are provided.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "bettear-museum-tours", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bettear-museum-tours/", "title": "Museums & Visitor Centers", "authors": "Bettear", "publisher": "Bettear", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer application guidance", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Bettear, maker of the Auracast equipment described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://bettear.com/solutions/museums-and-visitor-centers", "summary": "Bettear describes live Auracast tours and exhibit playback using its RTX receivers, including stored audio synchronized by timecode.", "findings": [ "Describes live guide voice broadcasting and self-guided exhibit playback.", "Distinguishes live Auracast audio, unsynchronized on-demand files on RTX, and files on RTX synchronized to a timecode stream.", "For the timecode mode, says audio files reside on each RTX and the CASTER transmits timing information; this differs from broadcasting the audio itself.", "Describes selection from a track list or NFC exhibit tags, and a dispatch panel assigning devices to tours and groups. Its Tour Builder lists proximity triggers as a future feature." ], "limitations": "Product marketing without independent museum field results, visitor sample or comparative intelligibility measurements. The described stored-file and timecode functions depend on the manufacturer ecosystem and do not establish those functions on visitors’ own hearing devices. Undated, read in October 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "cochlear-2026-nucleus-8", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cochlear-2026-nucleus-8/", "title": "Nucleus 8 Sound Processor (product page)", "authors": "Cochlear", "publisher": "Cochlear US website", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Cochlear)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.cochlear.com/us/en/home/products-and-accessories/cochlear-nucleus-system/nucleus-sound-processors/nucleus-8", "summary": "Cochlear's US product page for the Nucleus 8 cochlear implant sound processor, including its statements on Bluetooth LE Audio and Auracast.", "findings": [ "Describes the processor as ready for next-generation Bluetooth, so that users will be able to connect to Auracast broadcasts in public venues such as airports, schools and gyms.", "States that a firmware update will allow connection to LE Audio devices \"when the technology becomes available\" for the processor. No date is given." ], "limitations": "An undated product page read on 9 October 2026. It states an intention, not a demonstrated feature.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "future-proofing", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "hearing-dogs-other-systems", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hearing-dogs-other-systems/", "title": "Other assistive listening systems", "authors": "Hearing Dogs for Deaf People", "publisher": "Hearing Dogs for Deaf People", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy guidance page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Hearing Dogs for Deaf People, a UK charity whose support pages include Hearing Link Services; the page thanks the loop and Auracast maker Ampetronic for help creating it, and Ampetronic's owner, Allvida, also owns the Wi-Fi system maker Listen Technologies)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Infrared", "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.hearingdogs.org.uk/support/living/assistive-technology/systems", "summary": "A UK charity's consumer page on the assistive listening systems people may meet in public places besides hearing loops: infrared, audio over Wi-Fi and Auracast.", "findings": [ "Describes audio over Wi-Fi as sound streamed over the venue's public Wi-Fi or a dedicated network to an app, provided by the venue or the system's maker, on the listener's smartphone, found in places such as gyms, sports bars and churches, especially where listeners can choose between audio channels.", "Says clear signs and helpful staff should be available to explain how to connect, and that relying on listeners' own phones may not suit everyone, especially people without a smartphone or without confidence in using apps; some venues offer pre-set phones with the app installed.", "Names as a benefit that listeners use a device they already know, which it calls easier and more private than borrowing equipment, and as a downside latency, which can be confusing in small rooms or when lipreading and may get worse when the sound is streamed to hearing aids over Bluetooth.", "Describes infrared receivers borrowed from the venue and used with headphones or a neckloop set to the hearing aid's T or loop setting, and advises asking to move seat if reception is poor.", "Says most people do not yet have Auracast devices, so venues may offer receivers and headphones, and that choosing a stream on a phone, perhaps with a password or QR code, is more complex than switching a hearing aid to T; it reports that experts recommend offering both Auracast and hearing loops during the transition." ], "limitations": "A short consumer page with no data or references. Written with help from a maker whose parent company also owns a Wi-Fi system maker. The page carries no date. The old Hearing Link address for the Wi-Fi section redirects to this page.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency", "wifi-networks", "signage-and-awareness", "places-of-worship", "using-each-system" ] }, { "id": "oticon-genie2-auracast-settings", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/oticon-genie2-auracast-settings/", "title": "Oticon Genie 2: Enjoy intuitive fitting for individual needs", "authors": "Oticon (Demant)", "publisher": "Oticon professional website", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer fitting software guidance", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Oticon / Demant)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.oticon.com/professionals/clinical-experience/genie-2", "summary": "Oticon describes the clinician controls for enabling Auracast in Genie 2 and its in-clinic firmware updating tools.", "findings": [ "The Auracast broadcast adjustments panel says hearing care professionals can disable or enable Auracast in Accessories, or through Buttons and taps under Controls in Genie 2.", "The panel applies from Intent miniRITE R with firmware 1.3.0 and Intent miniBTE R onwards.", "The Firmware Updater section describes on-the-spot updates to hearing aids and accessories without sending them for service. For wireless hearing aids from More onwards, it names Noahlink Wireless or Noahlink Wireless 2 for firmware updates.", "It asks professionals to install the latest Genie 2 version because new hearing aids may contain firmware incompatible with older installations." ], "limitations": "Undated manufacturer guidance, read on 13 October 2026. The Auracast panel was read from the server-provided content embedded in the directly fetched HTML. It gives no default enabled state, numerical stream-to-microphone mix, or evidence about how often clinicians check these settings.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-hearing-aid-setup" ] }, { "id": "cha-2026-places-of-worship", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-2026-places-of-worship/", "title": "Places of Worship-Assistive Listening", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access, The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy resource", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, an initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "RF/FM", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/places-of-worship/", "summary": "An advocacy page for churches, mosques and synagogues on where to provide assistive listening, how to promote it, and where to find faith-specific disability resources.", "findings": [ "Calls hearing loops and FM/RF systems \"invaluable\" for taking part in religious communities, and says that without an effective system many worshippers sit in frustration \"Or worse, stay at home instead\".", "Lists possible locations and systems: sanctuaries (hearing loop, FM system); parlours (loop, FM); smaller study rooms (permanent or portable loop or FM); confessionals and private counselling rooms (permanent or portable loop, personal FM system); and funerals and memorial services.", "Offers a bulletin paragraph for a looped church, telling telecoil users to switch to T and others that they \"may check out a portable receiver and headphones from an usher\", plus a two-page template and checklist for promoting a loop, FM/RF or infrared system.", "Quotes a member of a Grand Rapids, Michigan, congregation reporting that, as members had their telecoils activated, loop users rose from one to over 10 in four months.", "States that British houses of worship, including cathedrals, are extensively looped, and offers lists of hearing loops by faith tradition on request; it links to its separate pages on Auracast and on audio over Wi-Fi, and to disability resources of more than a dozen US denominations." ], "limitations": "An advocacy page without data beyond one congregant's quote; the Center labels hearing loops \"Consumer Preferred\" elsewhere on its site. It gives no evidence for its statement about British houses of worship. The page shows no date; its metadata gives first publication on 19 February 2024 and a last change on 17 September 2026.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "places-of-worship" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-profile-tuning-suite", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-profile-tuning-suite/", "title": "Profile Tuning Suite (PTS)", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Technical guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Standards body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark; technical testing documentation)", "fundingLabel": "Standards body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/develop-with-bluetooth/qualify/qualification-test-tools/profile-tuning-suite/", "summary": "The SIG describes the software used to automate checks of Bluetooth host and profile functions above the Host Controller Interface.", "findings": [ "Defines PTS as software that automates testing against specified functional requirements for Bluetooth Host Parts and specifications above the Host Controller Interface.", "Describes full validated test coverage as the tool’s vision, rather than stating that every possible product behavior has already been covered.", "Says a PTS testing dongle is required to test a physical device and that software downloads are available to registered SIG members.", "The release information describes integration with Qualification Workspace to transfer test plans, test cases and execution evidence." ], "limitations": "Undated tool documentation with changing release information, read on 13 October 2026. No software was downloaded or run and no member-only test results were read. Functional protocol testing is the stated scope; the page provides no venue measurements.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "bluetooth-sig-qualification-test-facilities", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bluetooth-sig-qualification-test-facilities/", "title": "Qualification test facilities", "authors": "Bluetooth SIG", "publisher": "Bluetooth SIG", "date": "undated", "kind": "Qualification guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Trade body (Bluetooth SIG, an industry association funded by its member companies, which owns the Auracast trademark; test-facility programme guidance)", "fundingLabel": "Trade body", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.bluetooth.com/develop-with-bluetooth/qualify/qualification-test-facilities/", "summary": "The SIG explains when a product’s qualification test plan requires a recognized test facility and distinguishes outside laboratories from a company’s own facility.", "findings": [ "A Bluetooth Qualification Test Facility is recognized to execute Category A test cases at or below the Host Controller Interface as identified in the Test Case Reference List.", "When Qualification Workspace requires such a test, results must come from a Bluetooth Qualification Test Facility or the member company’s own Bluetooth Recognized Test Facility.", "A Bluetooth Recognized Test Facility may not act as an independent testing facility for other SIG member companies.", "The page lists testing facilities with their authorized testing scope and recognition expiry dates; those entries concern product testing facilities, rather than venue installation checks." ], "limitations": "Undated public programme guidance and a changing directory, read on 13 October 2026. The introductory testing requirements were read; individual facility competence and directory entries were not audited.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-qualification" ] }, { "id": "ampetronic-regular-staff-checks", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/ampetronic-regular-staff-checks/", "title": "Regular simple staff checks", "authors": "Ampetronic", "publisher": "Ampetronic", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer operational guidance", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Ampetronic, maker of the loop receivers and measurement tools described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.ampetronic.com/info-centre/learning-zone/testing-and-maintaining/regular-simple-staff-checks/", "summary": "Ampetronic distinguishes frequent staff checks with its listening tools from occasional professional meter measurements.", "findings": [ "Says loops provide benefit only when switched on and adjusted correctly.", "Describes frequent simple checks using its ILR3+ or Loopworks Measure app, and separately asks for occasional measurements with a professional meter.", "Links two demonstration videos, one for the app and one for the ILR3+." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer guidance about its own tools, with no measured accuracy, numerical checking interval or validation study. Only the public text was read; embedded videos were not watched. The text does not specify app accessories or establish that a phone alone measures a loop. No publication date is displayed.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "boothroyd-room-acoustics", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/boothroyd-room-acoustics/", "title": "Room Acoustics and Speech Reception: A Model and Some Implications", "authors": "Boothroyd A", "publisher": "ACCESS: Achieving Clear Communication Employing Sound Solutions, chapter 22, pp. 207–216; hosted by Phonak", "date": "undated", "kind": "Technical book chapter (acoustic model)", "type": "Other research", "funding": "Manufacturer (preparation partly supported by Phonic Ear Inc.; also NIDRR rehabilitation-engineering grant support to Gallaudet University; hosted by Phonak)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.phonak.com/content/dam/phonak/en/evidence-library/journal-article/ACCESS_Chapter_22_Arthur_Boothroyd.pdf", "summary": "An explanatory model separates direct speech, early reflections, late reverberation and background noise when predicting speech reception.", "findings": [ "The direct speech component falls by 6 dB per doubling of distance. Reflected sound also contributes, so this is not a rule for the total level at every indoor seat.", "The model combines direct speech and early reflections as useful signal and treats late reverberation as an additional masking contribution. A measured speech-to-background-noise ratio can omit this reverberation penalty.", "Its illustrative audibility model reaches full signal audibility at +15 dB effective SNR. Translating audibility into word recognition depends on hearing, language, context and listener skill.", "Raising loudspeaker output raises both useful speech and its late reflections; the model predicts less benefit when late reverberation dominates than when independent background noise dominates." ], "limitations": "Model and worked examples, not a new listener trial or a universal hearing-loss threshold. The extracted chapter has no explicit publication date, so none is inferred from search results or file metadata. Classroom amplification and personal FM examples are used only to explain the acoustic path; neither is a venue product recommendation.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "room-acoustics" ] }, { "id": "bettear-rtx", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/bettear-rtx/", "title": "RTX – Smart Auracast Transceiver", "authors": "Bettear", "publisher": "Bettear", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product specification", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Bettear, maker of the RTX)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast", "Shared" ], "url": "https://bettear.com/products/rtx", "summary": "Bettear describes a handheld transmitter, receiver and media player for live and self-guided tours, with a neckloop connection.", "findings": [ "Describes transmitter and receiver modes, live voice broadcasting and preloaded tour content.", "Lists a 3.5 mm TRRS connection for headsets, neckloops or microphones, and stream selection features including filtering, locking and NFC access.", "States battery life of up to 16 hours in receiver mode and 10 hours in transmitter mode, and a charge time under four hours.", "States coverage up to 50 m at 20 dBm without an occupied-museum measurement protocol." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer specifications, not measured museum outcomes. Actual coverage, battery endurance and compatibility across visitors’ devices are not demonstrated. Undated page read in October 2026; versions and enabled functions may change.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "museums-and-tours" ] }, { "id": "williams-ir-sy2-conference-kit", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/williams-ir-sy2-conference-kit/", "title": "Small-area Infrared System for Two (IR SY2)", "authors": "Williams AV", "publisher": "Williams AV", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer system description", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Williams AV, maker of the infrared system)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared", "Shared" ], "url": "https://williamsav.com/product/ir-t01-s02/", "summary": "A compact infrared kit illustrates the components supplied for small conference-room listening.", "findings": [ "Lists a transmitter, two receivers, headphones, one neckloop, batteries and a charger; names small conference rooms among its applications.", "Specifies a 3.5 mm audio input, AC or USB power, and one- or two-channel operation." ], "limitations": "Product description without independent performance testing or a publication date. The packaged receiver and neckloop counts do not establish what a particular venue must provide. Read through the browser retrieval tool; direct download returned 403 and no HTML copy was obtained.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "hotels-and-conference-centres" ] }, { "id": "pncc-audio-loops-compliance-schedule", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/pncc-audio-loops-compliance-schedule/", "title": "SS 12/1 Audio loops: compliance schedule details for a building consent application (Form 2)", "authors": "Palmerston North City Council; Manawatu District Council", "publisher": "Palmerston North City Council and Manawatu District Council, Building Services (New Zealand)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Regulatory form (building compliance schedule, New Zealand)", "type": "Law and regulation", "funding": "Government (two New Zealand district councils acting as building consent authorities)", "fundingLabel": "Government", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://www.pncc.govt.nz/files/assets/public/v/2/documents/building-amp-property/specified-systems-forms/ss-12.1.pdf", "summary": "Two New Zealand councils' form for audio loops as a specified system on a building's compliance schedule, setting the standards and the inspection, maintenance and reporting routine.", "findings": [ "Lists the standards an audio loop may be installed and inspected against: IEC 60118-4:2014 with its 2017 amendment, AS 60118.4-2007, AS 1088.4:1987 or BS EN IEC 60118-4:2015 with its 2018 amendment, or a specifically designed solution prepared by a competent person.", "For loops installed to a standard, sets inspections every six months by an independent qualified person (IQP) only; specifically designed solutions are also inspected by an IQP only.", "Each inspection must at least test the magnetic field strength over the specified area for the values in AS 60118.4, and the magnetic background noise wherever equipment near the loop has been installed, switched on or altered since the last inspection. Loop-based sound installations are also tested for sound pressure level and distortion, and for spectrum and speech intelligibility where the room's acoustics have changed.", "The owner keeps an on-site logbook of every inspection, test and repair for the previous 24 months, with dates, faults found, remedies and who did the work, and an annual Form 12A from the IQP." ], "limitations": "One council pair's form; other New Zealand councils publish their own sheets for the same specified system, which were not compared here (one could not be downloaded). The national regulation and the government's compliance schedule handbook could not be opened, so this record does not describe the national basis. It sets inspections, not results, so it says nothing about how often loops pass. The form shows no date (its PDF metadata gives 23 July 2021).", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "legal-status", "loop-verification", "venue-self-checks" ] }, { "id": "sennheiser-szi-1015", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/sennheiser-szi-1015/", "title": "SZI 1015 (product page)", "authors": "Sennheiser", "publisher": "Sennheiser (online catalogue)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Sennheiser, maker of the infrared radiator described)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Infrared" ], "url": "https://sennheiser.com/en-gb/catalog/products/wireless-systems/szi-1015/szi-1015-004394", "summary": "Sennheiser's catalogue page for its 2-watt infrared radiator, now marked as no longer available to buy.", "findings": [ "States: \"This product is no longer available to be purchased\".", "Describes the SZI 1015 as a 2-watt radiator for infrared transmission systems covering up to 400 m², supporting carrier frequencies of 2.3 and 2.8 MHz in single-channel, two-channel or stereo operation, switched on and off by the modulator's carrier and able to be daisy-chained.", "Names no successor product." ], "limitations": "An undated product page with no explanation: it shows that this radiator is no longer sold, not whether the maker has left infrared altogether. Sennheiser's spare-parts catalogue still lists its infrared modulators, radiators and receivers for service.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "infrared-limits" ] }, { "id": "contacta-installer-training", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/contacta-installer-training/", "title": "Training", "authors": "Contacta Inc.", "publisher": "Contacta Inc.", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer training programme", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Contacta Inc., which sells assistive listening equipment and provides the courses)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Infrared", "RF/FM" ], "url": "https://contactainc.com/services/training/", "summary": "Contacta describes practical and online installer courses, with completion certificates and a manufacturer training badge.", "findings": [ "Training is aimed at installers, architects, consultants and integrators, covering hearing loops and other systems including infrared and radio frequency.", "Lists IEC standards, installation methods, loop design, sound principles, magnetic background noise, site-survey meters and product specification among the subjects.", "Describes theoretical and practical work with Contacta staff, online courses adaptable to experience level and product range, and further technical training at an annual dealer meeting.", "Says every attendee receives a certificate on completing the course and a badge indicating training and support by Contacta." ], "limitations": "A manufacturer’s programme description. It does not publish an examination threshold, independent accreditation of the badge, renewal rules or measured outcomes for installations. No publication date is stated.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "installers-and-training" ] }, { "id": "univox-fsm-manual", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/univox-fsm-manual/", "title": "Univox FSM: Digital Field Strength Meter for AFILS, User manual (UP_5-0142-1.0-EN)", "authors": "Bo Edin AB / Univox", "publisher": "Bo Edin AB / Univox", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer instrument manual", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Bo Edin AB / Univox, maker of the meter and hearing loop systems)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops" ], "url": "https://univox.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/11/UP_5-0142-1.0-EN.pdf", "summary": "Specifications and operating instructions for a digital loop meter, including a calibration tolerance at one reference level and frequency.", "findings": [ "Page 8 specifies calibration accuracy of ±0.5 dB at 400 mA/m and 1 kHz. It gives 1 dB display resolution between -3 and +6 dB and between -29 and -20 dB; resolution and calibration accuracy are separate specifications.", "Page 8 identifies part number 401016 and gives high and low ranges of -18 to +8 dB and -44 to -18 dB relative to 0.4 A/m. It specifies RMS detection at 125 ms or a peak programme meter mode with a 3.5 ms rise time and a 1.7 s fall time for a 20 dB fall.", "Page 8 gives flat-response accuracy better than ±1 dB from 50 Hz to 10 kHz; A-weighted response is better than ±1 dB from 100 Hz to 10 kHz and ±2 dB from 25 Hz to 20 kHz.", "Page 4 recommends annual recalibration because accuracy can change with time, and a calibration check after the meter is dropped or damaged, followed by recalibration if needed.", "Page 5 describes the coil location and orientation, particularly for small counter and neck loops. It says the low range applies A-weighting and disables the flat-response option. Headphone monitoring works in both ranges and filter settings.", "Page 4 says a flashing blue range indicator means the batteries need replacing. Pages 6-7 ask users to define test points and listening heights, use the low range for background noise, use high range with flat response for field strength, and record the 100 Hz and 5 kHz readings relative to 1 kHz at each test point." ], "limitations": "Manufacturer specifications, not an independent comparison or a measured uncertainty budget for a venue survey. The ±0.5 dB specification applies at the stated reference level and frequency. No publication date is printed; the URL upload directory is not treated as a publication date.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "measuring-tools" ] }, { "id": "google-android-broadcast-selection", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/google-android-broadcast-selection/", "title": "Use multiple Bluetooth audio accessories at once on an Android device", "authors": "Google", "publisher": "Android Help", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer support page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (Google, developer of Android)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://support.google.com/android/answer/16550669?hl=en", "summary": "Android help describes a broadcast list on Samsung devices and a QR route for LE Audio accessories.", "findings": [ "The introduction says a phone can scan public LE Audio broadcasts and help connected headphones or hearing devices receive them; it requires a phone and accessories supporting LE Audio.", "The Samsung joining section directs the user through Bluetooth settings, the accessory settings and Find a broadcast, then selection from a list.", "The Join a broadcast section requires connected LE Audio headphones, scanning a QR code from a device sharing its audio, then selecting Playlist and Listen. This example describes device-to-device sharing, with no venue deployment or subgroup-selection test." ], "limitations": "Undated instructions read on 13 October 2026; no model or operating-system matrix, subgroup-selection example, language-filter behaviour or usability measurements. A broadcast list does not establish that every subgroup is separately displayed.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "auracast-multiple-streams" ] }, { "id": "cha-telecoils-ci", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/cha-telecoils-ci/", "title": "Using Telecoils in Your Cochlear Implant & Bone Anchored Devices", "authors": "Center for Hearing Access (The John G. Shedd Institute)", "publisher": "Center for Hearing Access", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy guidance page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Center for Hearing Access, a 501(c)(3) advocacy and education initiative of The John G. Shedd Institute for the Arts, founded in 2024; it states that it accepts no donations from hearing-related vendors)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://centerforhearingaccess.org/how-use-telecoils-ci/", "summary": "A US advocacy group's notes on where the telecoil sits in current cochlear implant and bone-anchored sound processors, and how users switch to it.", "findings": [ "Opens by saying all cochlear implants and bone conduction devices have telecoils, and that most users prefer the telecoil in the processor itself rather than in an accessory, because it is easier to use and to remember.", "Its maker-by-maker notes show the telecoil is not always built in: Advanced Bionics' Naída CI Marvel has a built-in telecoil once the audiologist enables it, and Cochlear's Nucleus 8 has a telecoil program selected by button, remote or app.", "For Cochlear's Kanso and Baha 6 processors it points to the telecoil setting on the Mini Mic 2+ accessory. For MED-EL it lists a built-in telecoil in Sonnet 2, an accessory (AudioLink XT) for Sonnet 3, a telecoil adaptor for Rondo 3 and an accessory (miniTek) for Samba.", "Describes microphone and telecoil mixing settings, such as 50/50 to hear a neighbour while listening to the loop, or telecoil only to cut background sound, and notes that some apps let users set their own mix." ], "limitations": "The publisher calls the manufacturer information it found \"scant\" and asks readers to send more; it gives no data on how many processors in use have a built-in telecoil, and its opening statement sits uneasily with its own list of processors that rely on accessories. The page shows no date (its metadata gives first publication on 1 July 2024 and a last change on 13 October 2025); models change, so the list may be out of date.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "device-compatibility", "listener-reach", "telecoil-fitting", "cochlear-implants" ] }, { "id": "hlaa-wifi-audio-guide", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/hlaa-wifi-audio-guide/", "title": "Wi-Fi Audio Assistive Listening System: How It Works", "authors": "Hearing Loss Association of America", "publisher": "Hearing Loss Association of America", "date": "undated", "kind": "Advocacy guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Nonprofit advocacy (Hearing Loss Association of America)", "fundingLabel": "Nonprofit advocacy", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.hearingloss.org/technology-and-accessibility/wi-fi-audio/", "summary": "An explanation of venue Wi-Fi audio through personal phones or dedicated receivers, including connection steps and delay.", "findings": [ "How does Wi-Fi audio work? and the FAQs describe selecting the desired audio stream in an app, with separate channels possible for different rooms, events or content. These passages address stream selection, without testing whether listeners understand the controls.", "Describes delivery of a venue's audio through a Wi-Fi network to a phone app or dedicated receiver, followed by wired headphones, Bluetooth earbuds or another compatible listening device.", "Internet access is not necessary for basic audio transmission, but the listener must connect to the network carrying the stream. Some venues supply receivers for people without suitable phones or who prefer not to use one.", "Explains that network coverage, apps, receiver compatibility and listening accessories affect the experience; delay can cause echo or a mismatch with lip movements.", "At the end of What equipment does a listener need?, HLAA describes delivery from source to listener as reducing the effects of distance, background noise and reverberation." ], "limitations": "General guidance without measurements or a user study. It does not establish compatibility for individual phone, earbud or app combinations. No publication date is displayed.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "chautauqua-2026-wifi-listening", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/chautauqua-2026-wifi-listening/", "title": "Wi-Fi Based Assistive Listening System", "authors": "Chautauqua Institution", "publisher": "Chautauqua Institution", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue guidance (operator's page for patrons)", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (Chautauqua Institution, a not-for-profit organisation in Chautauqua, New York, writing about the system in its own halls; the system is Listen Technologies' ListenWIFI)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://www.chq.org/visit/explore-the-grounds-and-gardens/accessibility/wi-fi-based-assistive-listening-system/", "summary": "A venue's own guide to the Wi-Fi assistive listening system it introduced in 2024 and has extended across its halls, with what patrons need, how to join and what to do about echo and dropouts.", "findings": [ "Says the system was introduced in 2024 after extensive testing, expanded to four venues in 2025 and to three more in 2026, and that user feedback indicates it \"works best for patrons with moderate to severe hearing loss\".", "Patrons need an Android or Apple smartphone or tablet that can download apps, and Bluetooth headphones or hearing aids already paired with it, or wired headphones. They join the amphitheatre's guest Wi-Fi or, in other halls, a network named for the hall (for example \"Bratton Listen\"), then start the app and choose the venue. Allowing the app location access helps it connect to the right server, and staff help patrons set it up before Sunday events.", "Explains the echo some listeners hear as latency between the loudspeakers and the stream, and suggests wired noise-cancelling headphones, muting hearing aid microphones in the hearing aid's app, and closing other apps.", "Says buffering can build up so that the echo grows during a lecture, and that pausing and restarting the stream clears it, which may be needed more than once on older phones. Wi-Fi routers can sometimes lag and the signal be lost for a moment or two; live captions are offered as a backup.", "Does not lend headphones for phones, saying the point of the system is to let patrons use the phones and hearing aids that suit them, and keeps its existing RF system, with free loan receivers, alongside the Wi-Fi system.", "Tells listeners \"A fully charged device would be very helpful\", and says muting the hearing aids' microphones \"eliminates the echo\".", "The Benefits section says using personal devices avoids collecting a venue receiver. Before Arriving at the Amphitheater asks patrons to install ListenWiFi and test their audio connection with music or video; it recommends location permission to help find the correct server but explicitly calls that permission optional. When You Arrive at the Venue directs listeners to choose the venue in the app and then press play." ], "limitations": "A venue's instructions and summary of user feedback, with no numbers of users, measurements or survey method. The page shows no date; its metadata gives first publication on 18 July 2024 and a last change on 31 July 2026, and the text describes the 2026 season.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "wifi-networks", "lifetime-costs", "using-each-system", "earbuds-and-phones-without-hearing-aids" ] }, { "id": "chautauqua-wifi-beta-testing", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/chautauqua-wifi-beta-testing/", "title": "Wi-Fi Based Assistive Listening System (beta testing page)", "authors": "Chautauqua Institution", "publisher": "Chautauqua Institution (visitor information page)", "date": "undated", "kind": "Venue guidance page", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (Chautauqua Institution, a nonprofit arts and education centre in New York State that runs the Listen Wi-Fi system it describes; the advice draws on its own user feedback)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Wi-Fi streaming" ], "url": "https://chq.org/visit/explore-the-grounds-and-gardens/accessibility/wi-fi-based-assistive-listening-system-beta-testing", "summary": "A venue's guide for visitors using its Wi-Fi assistive listening system on their own phones at live lectures and performances, including what to do about echo.", "findings": [ "Reports that the venue introduced the system in 2024 after testing, extended it to its amphitheater and several halls and theatres in 2025, and to further venues in 2026; listeners use their own phones with Bluetooth headphones or hearing aids, or wired headphones.", "Explains an \"echo\" heard by some listeners as latency, the time difference between the venue's loudspeakers and the Wi-Fi sound reaching the listener's device, and says its user feedback shows the system works best for patrons with moderate to severe hearing loss.", "To reduce the echo it suggests wired noise-cancelling headphones, and muting the hearing aids' microphones where the hearing aid app allows, which it says blocks or minimises the loudspeaker sound and \"eliminates the echo\".", "Advises closing other apps, which it says can add to the latency, and, if the echo grows during a session, pausing and restarting the stream to clear the buffering, which may need repeating on older phones.", "Notes that Wi-Fi routers can lag and drop the signal for a moment, and points listeners to live captions to catch every word." ], "limitations": "A venue's own guidance with no measurements: the latency is not quantified, and the statements on who benefits and what reduces the echo rest on unpublished user feedback. The page carries no date; it mentions the 2026 season. It covers one system, used through the ListenWifi app, at one venue, and the page's address still calls it beta testing.", "accessed": "2026-10-09", "citedBy": [ "wifi-latency" ] }, { "id": "widex-2026-allure-auracast", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/widex-2026-allure-auracast/", "title": "Widex Allure AI RIC R D (product page)", "authors": "Widex (WS Audiology)", "publisher": "Widex website", "date": "undated", "kind": "Manufacturer product page", "type": "Manufacturer documents", "funding": "Manufacturer (WS Audiology / Widex)", "fundingLabel": "Manufacturer", "technologies": [ "Auracast" ], "url": "https://www.widex.com/en/hearing-aids/allure/ai-ric-r-d/", "summary": "Widex's product page for the Allure AI RIC R D, including its statement on when Auracast will arrive.", "findings": [ "States that Allure includes Bluetooth LE Audio and that Auracast support, among other connectivity features, will arrive through a future software and app update in 2026, with availability varying by market and device.", "States that the hearing aid has a built-in telecoil for hearing loops.", "The product heading identifies the RIC R D style, and the introductory section describes it as the next generation with Clarity Boost. The page gives no introduction year; the 2026 model identification comes from the separate Center for Hearing Access device list." ], "limitations": "An undated product page; when read on 13 October 2026 it still described the Auracast update as future. It gives no detail of how wearers will join broadcasts.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "future-proofing" ] }, { "id": "strathclyde-deaf-students-guidance", "page": "https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/strathclyde-deaf-students-guidance/", "title": "Working with students who are d/Deaf or hearing impaired", "authors": "University of Strathclyde Disability & Wellbeing Service", "publisher": "University of Strathclyde", "date": "undated", "kind": "University disability-service guidance", "type": "Guidance and advocacy", "funding": "Independent (University of Strathclyde Disability & Wellbeing Service)", "fundingLabel": "Independent", "technologies": [ "Hearing loops", "Shared" ], "url": "https://www.strath.ac.uk/professionalservices/disabilityandwellbeing/informationforstaff/workingwithstudentswhoareddeaforhearingimpaired/", "summary": "Disability-service guidance explains who maintains teaching-room loops and how microphones and discussion practices affect students’ access.", "findings": [ "Loops are installed in central pool teaching rooms and maintained by Teaching Space Support, ISD. The service says the lecturer must wear a microphone for students using the hearing-aid T setting.", "For discussions using a radio microphone or loop system, every contributor needs to speak into the microphone. The guidance also asks for contributions one at a time and repeated questions or comments.", "Adjustments are agreed with the student to address individual needs and complement existing support and equipment.", "The service explains that students may use human support instead of or alongside technology and may need different arrangements in different learning settings." ], "limitations": "Undated staff guidance, not an audit of the listed loops or a student survey. Includes personal radio aids and other access services beyond this question’s scope; used for installed loops, responsibility and shared microphone practices only.", "accessed": "2026-10-13", "citedBy": [ "lecture-halls" ] } ] }