Confirmation Bias

[JohnRoberts]

I used to have great conversations with a fellow console designer (now RIP) about factors that influenced perceived sound quality. We identified more than a few while many were subtle.

[edit- back in the 70s working as a technician at a company developing pitch shifting for speech playback, we added an extra knob for the boss to twiddle that wasn't connected to anything.. /edit]

JR

 

[soapfoot]

And i've stop counting the number of time a talent asks me for something in their monitor while i'm working on something else, then i hear: "Thanks! That's perfect!" And i'm thinking "what did he ask for again?".

Thomas

I’ve been on both sides of this one, without doubt!

 

[RuudNL]

How often have I "successfully" processed a signal with the EQ only to realize that I was on the wrong channel.

It happens to all of us! And anyone who says this has never happened to him is lying...

 

[Ike Zimbel]

I chuckled when I read that, because I've had the same thing happen a thousand times when I changed something by maybe 1dB or else moved a completely unrelated fader. It long ago became my default technique when some chronic monitor jockey on the stage starts screaming, "More monitor, more monitor!," when it's already so stupid loud I can hear it over the FOH mains 20 meters away. Move an unrelated blank fader up a few dB or twist some knob while they're looking at you, and just about 100% of the time you get a nod or gesture of approval.

It was by making these minuscule moves on a gig, many years ago, that I acquired a nickname: "Ike the Teeny Turner". That was in 1979...I found out about the nickname sometime in the 90's

 

[Whoops]

And i've stop counting the number of time a talent asks me for something in their monitor while i'm working on something else, then i hear: "Thanks! That's perfect!" And i'm thinking "what did he ask for again?".

That's a classic, it always happening when doing monitor mixes in Live Sound.

Just finished mixing a record where I received from the artist notes for the revision of 1 song. it was 10 revision points she wanted me to change. So I did it, the problem was that it was late and I was very tired so I sent her the wrong file, by mistake I sent her the same mix she heard before without the revisions, but the file said "Mix Revision".
Next day I figured out that I've sent the wrong file and just when I was going to call to explain the situation I receive a message from her saying: "Thank you it's sounding much better and perfect now with the changes made, the record is finished you can send it to mastering today"

 

[Barry Hufker]

I've been involved in recording sessions where some member of the orchestra thought they ought to have a mic on them. And so they did! But it wasn't plugged in anywhere...

 

[Ike Zimbel]

I've been involved in recording sessions where some member of the orchestra thought they ought to have a mic on them. And so they did! But it wasn't plugged in anywhere...

In the early 80's I was mixing a nine-piece latin-jazz band. Sunday nights we played a small room in Toronto that had an 8-channel powered mixer for the PA. I don't recall the exact distribution of inputs but I know it did not include the 4-piece horn section. Generally, it sounded pretty good, except that the horns were always loud-as-f**k and there was nothing I could do about that. One Sunday, one of the horn players buttonholed me and said "How come we don't have a mic? We're up there blowing our brains out trying to be heard!". Well, I had a mic for them, I just didn't have an input. So, I put the mic, an RE-11, on a stand for them, plugged in a cable and ran it across the floor and under a curtain. Totally fixed the mix! Just seeing the mic there was enough to get them to relax and play with the band, instead of over it.

 

[zamproject]

Next day I figured out that I've sent the wrong file and just when I was going to call to explain the situation I receive a message from her saying: "Thank you it's sounding much better and perfect now with the changes made, the record is finished you can send it to mastering today"

This is a tricky situation that happen to me at both end, that IMO should be shared with the client.

Delivering the wrong mix revision by mistake, happy client, but I still explain and let the client know, then let the client choose over this knowledge since I also explain -confirmation bias- or whatever is usual, and not a problem or a shame, just how lot of things happen...

Me on the other -client- side is event more tricky...I receive a master revision (I ask for it) to reviewer again, for artist I mix an album.
The second revision was a joke, I ask for little more dynamic (so little less level too).
I usually listen by level matching the revisions (and the mix accros), but when doing that (by more or less trying to null the files) it appear the last revision was just 1dB digital level lower, perfect null (except on two or 3 transient in a whole song)
The full album was just lower but without any dynamic benefit, at this point I was thinking the (renowned) ME was taking us for idiots and I don't need any more discussion, so we decide to take the louder one...and ME never knows what's going on at our side but lost us for any other job.

The lesson of this is of course sens bias is an important factor in the complex equation your job request, but never underestimate that there is smart clients that deal with the bias, understand what's going on, and just deal with more important things, if you fail integrity, you lost the trust. Human factor is 80% of the job whatever the bias sit on.

 

[spiders]

I have definitely been on both sides of this one. Back when I was doing FOH and monitors at a crappy club here in town I had plenty of artists ask for changes in the monitors that apparently were fixed by a ghost before I had time to get to them. Also on more than one occasion one of the cocaine addled business partners who somehow were in charge of the sound for the club would come storming in and have me adjust every band of the 31 band house eq in sequence while they stood in the middle of the room and said, “ok…..yes…..no……alright that’s good”. Invariably upon hearing that one coke monster had adjusted the eq the other human snowstorm would barrel in and have me do same thing to undo the first guys work. Regardless of who was doing the yelling the eq would end up pretty inappropriate and after they had receded to their dens me or one of the other house guys would get it back in line prior to show time. Needless to say after a few times of the bosses running this charade we house engineers stopped adjusting the eq at all when they would come in. The process of them yelling would take just as long, but saved us all the time resetting the eq once they were gone.
On the other side I recently discovered, to my horror, that my SM7B is counterfeit. I have used it quite a bit in a variety of applications and always been pleased with it. I now find myself seeking ways to convince myself that it is a bad microphone, despite its proven track record. I wonder how I would feel about it had I bought it knowing it was counterfeit

 

[Tubetec]

I took over a live sound gig at one point , one of the first things I did was bypass the graphics to the FOH , I was able to make a few minor adjustments with the system controler and I was happy to work off channel EQ . A few of the older engineers were back in on various gigs , one started screaching and roaring when they saw the main graphic was a flat line ,wheres the house curve gone ? then proceeded to do what they always did anyway , ring out the system for 10 minutes , then they'd take another 30 minutes doing the soundcheck with the band , they tended to have a formulaic over complicated ,one size fits all approach .
Theres only so much you can do in a soundcheck , it all changes as the place fills up and temp and humidity rises ,

 

[Whoops]

This is a tricky situation that happen to me at both end, that IMO should be shared with the client.

Delivering the wrong mix revision by mistake, happy client, but I still explain and let the client know, then let the client choose over this knowledge since I also explain -confirmation bias- or whatever is usual, and not a problem or a shame, just how lot of things happen...

For sure I told her, I never fool my clients, even if sometimes they fool themselves.
It was my mistake no problem in that, it can happen, I called her and the producer after the message I received explaining the situation.

In this particular situation the final call was from the producer and not the singer as she was not very experienced and her evaluation of a mix was more based in her mood of the day and not on sound, she was clever and admitted that her judgement of the mixes was flawed and trusted the experienced Producer to do the final call.
He decided to use the original mix as he was not agreeing with her revision notes anyway and the fact that she couldn't discern that the mixes were exactly the same made him feel that the mix shouldn't be changed in the first place.
It's their working chemistry, in the end I'm happy that they are both happy clients.