If So, Why????? (Science-Based Input Sought, Please)

If, in the case of acoustic-trauma-induced tinnitus, it is posited that the brain reacts to the loss of certain incoming frequencies (via hearing loss) by "producing" them to fill in the gap, then ...

HOW COME I can still hear external sounds that exactly match the frequency/volume of the tinnitus that is being generated by my brain?

And even hear external sound frequencies above that level?

This has always had me wondering ...

I would love some input from the members who have great science backgrounds! THANK YOU!

 

Well I don't know, but I can give my 2 cents. From my understanding there is a whole set of auditory nerve fibers that aren't really active until sounds reach an adequate level. You can lose high threshold nerve fibers and still have low threshold nerve fibers in tact. Maybe tinnitus caused by acoustic trauma is sometimes caused by a loss of these high threshold nerve fibers.

 

Thanks for offering your idea, Alue!

Bumpity bump bump, bump, bump!

Can we have more ideas???

 

To me it seems like whatever is causing the tinnitus is damaged, so it still works but the damage is creating the tinnitus. It's not fully dead, so it's putting off the false feedback to the brain. If that makes sense.

It's ironic is that our ears need sound enrichment when in fact are ears are damaged by sound.

 

Well they keep telling us that but.....

 

The entire sound enrichment seems to be a fill in the blank that they don't know what to do.

 

Oh @Cityjohn , I've held back, but it's time to tag ya! Thoughts?

 

That's something that struck me as quite odd too when I first got tinnitus.
I kind of go into that here; https://www.tinnitustalk.com/threads/chapter-2-what-is-tinnitus.15681/
But to put it in fewer words you can have signal noise and yet still hear additional noise on the same frequency. You just can't hear any less of it... The brain uses an ingenious way to determine what is cellular noise that can be thrown out halfway, and what is real sound coming from outside. It uses a simple principle where a node along the pathway just doesn't believe it when 5 out of 100 auditory pathways fire accidentally. Problems arise when 30/100 start firing, or when it's 5/30. Having less auditory pathways doesn't mean you hear less, just like closing an eye doesn't make the image 50% less bright. It just means you'll have very poor signal to noise ratios.

 

You may have a look at my view on tinnitus, which I posted here:

https://www.tinnitustalk.com/threads/moderate-sound-levels-do-not-matter.16083/

 

I've made similar observations in other threads. I did read of someone who plugged his ears for a year or so, ignoring the sound therapy club. Got better. We keep hearing soothing things that reassure us but from what I can see thus far there is no good science to support any one therapeutic modality, unless you think questionnaires about how upset you are constitute science.
I not long ago used the broken leg analogy. No-one tells you you need to go out running to treat a broken leg, but you do re-introduce activity progressively once the worst of the injury is past. I see no reason why sound injury shouldn't be treated the same.