There is an Australian company called Neuromonics that might really be
on to something.  The website is www.neuromonics.com.au 

The protocol they are testing is not masking.  And it is not TRT.  The
differences are far from subtle, but you have to know what to look
for.

Basically, ADP revolves around the long-term effects of *purposely
masking and unmasking* tinnitus in a controlled prescribed fashion for
around two hours a day over a period of several months.  Music was
chosen as the medium of delivery because given that there would be
masking and unmasking (i.e., volume changes), music was felt to be
less obtrusive and noxious than some sort of broad band sound like
that used in traditional masking or in TRT (both reasonably
well-tolerated when there is *no* change in volume).  Additionally,
the music carries with it a bonus: since patients can choose from
between half-a-dozen or so genres of music, they can find one to their
liking - one that they indeed find relaxing.

In ADP before the prescribed music is delivered via a "walkman-like"
device to the patient, it is spectrally altered to compensate for the
characteristics of the patient's audiogram. The idea is to
intermittently stimulate the areas of the brain corresponding to any
cochlear hair cell damage that might be present.  But with traditional
masking the volume limit is dictated by the sound tolerance levels
corresponding to the *healthy* hair cells.  Davis et al wanted to be
sure to stimulate those areas precluded from their share of
stimulation by previous methodology.  So the music is altered based on
each patient's individual audiogram; those frequencies where there is
a decreased hearing threshold are thereby presented to the patient
more loudly.  In essence, the music is heard as it was meant to be
heard by a person with no hearing loss. Then, when the overall volume
level is increased to the proper level in accordance with the
protocol, the volume and pitch variations within the chosen musical
piece serve to effectively mask and unmask *and* intermittently
stimulate those heretofore neglected regions of the brain.

What is presently available to the Australian public (and what
apparently will become available elsewhere later this year or next) is
the first generation of the technology.  I believe that further
developments in the technology will be impressive.

In fact, I believe that ADP may well represent a quantum leap in the
field of tinnitus treatment.  Let me explain.

Please remember first of all that while the Curtin University study
(discussed on the wedbsite) was run by Dr. Davis, the Macquarie
University clinical trial was double-blinded and done totally
independently.  The Neuromonics people were not involved
except to do the spectral alteration of the music.  Furthermore, you
should know that an independent multi-center international blinded
trial is in the works.  In other words, these folks are not afraid to
open things up for all to evaluate and come to their own conclusions.

Next, the questionnaires used pre-treatment and post-treatment
included among others the "Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire" (Wilson,
Henry, et al), which is clearly one of the internationally accepted
and respected tinnitus measures.  The TRT studies to date, in
contrast, use questionnaires specifically designed by the TRT folks to
measure that which TRT is designed to do. (By the way, don't forget
that I'm a strong believer in TRT, but that doesn't mean that the
research is beyond criticism.)

So, according to the studies quoted on the Neuromonics website,
there's a reduction in disturbance from tinnitus as measured on the
TRQ in the ADP group that seems to be greater than that experienced by
either the counseling/education + white noise group or the
counseling/education alone group.  Well, that's early data.  It's
impressive, but still nothing that I would call "quantum."

Here's what makes ADP (if the data hold up) a "quantum" improvement
(in my opinion):

1.  ADP is technology-driven rather than counseling-driven.  So even
though there is some degree of instruction involved in the protocol,
it is *by far* easier to distribute than any of the counseling-driven
methodologies (like cognitive therapy or TRT).  And moreover it should
eventually become much cheaper as the technology improves.

BUT - what clinched it for me .

2.  The data thus far seem to indicate that ADP results in a decrease
in minimum masking level of the tinnitus - see:  www.tinyurl.com/3dooy

Recall, for instance, what TRT does:  it facilitates habituation and
in so doing decreases tinnitus loudness as it is perceived, but it
does not do anything to the tinnitus signal (i.e., tinnitus loudness
in dB on a tinnitus match and minimal masking levels are unchanged
after TRT).  But ADP seems to *decrease* minimum masking levels!  And
to my way of thinking that means that by intermittently stimulating
parts of the brain previously inaccessible, over time ADP attenuates
the tinnitus signal itself!  As far as I know, no tinnitus treatment
to date can lay claim to impacting the signal in the long term - only
its perception.  And to me, if the multi-center study confirms what
the Australian studies demonstrate, *that* is absolutely HUGE.

So .

Time will tell, but at least thus far I am quite hopeful.

Sorry for rambling. But I really think that ADP deserves a very close
look

smn