DFA Button

[BenHeysAudio]

I am currently conducting research on various forums on engineers perspective's to the question. Does using the DFA (Does ###### All) button work or cause conflicts? This is for my Dissertation I am in my final year studying Audio & Music Production. Please could you answer the question for me, with an explanation. It won't take long.

 

Does using the DFA (Does ###### All) button work or cause conflicts?

 

Thanks

 

Ben Heys

[Young Johnstone]

Ha this is of course a joke! But I'd say your work towards your dissertation could be classed as DFA!

[BenHeysAudio]

Thanks this is not a joke but thank you for your input

[GR1]

Yes. A one word answer doesn't need explanation.

[GaryNattrass]

We were once dubbing a programme at YTV and each time the producer  wanted changes we tweaked a few controls even thought we had locked out the dynamic automation on the AMS Neve Logic console. Each time we then played back more adjustments were made and after about six passes the producer was happy even though every time they were hearing the same mix!

 

<div><br></div><div>The main DFA adjustment was actually to just turn the monitors up a notch and that also seemed to work a treat!</div>

[Oldradiohand]

Tweaking the mic eq until it sounded awful and then putting it back to where you started from seemed to satisfy most of the old radio DJs. I have heard tell of the radio producer given an unrouted fader at the end of the desk to play with to keep him happy.....

[indyld]

There are also a lighting equivalents to the DFA, including a quick nudge to wobble a lantern while focusing which to the LD makes it "much better" despite the fact you haven't actually made any material change. The flip side is that I used to focus regularly with a LD who was always satisfied with a swift clonk, but had just spent several minutes telling you to "not keep fiddling with it" despite the fact you weren't touching the lantern at the time.

 

There is also the above notion of making something worse, in order to "make it better" ie. putting it back where you had it in the first place. This is a relation of leaving obviously messy cables on the deck that are easily fixed, in order to draw the eye of the project manager/client/producer. Without this, they just find other non-issues that are hell to sort out. They are going to find something, otherwise why are they there?

 

People need to feel that a) they should/must have an input (and/or are paid to have an input) and b) that their input makes thing better.

 

DFAs and their derivatives do work, the only reason for conflict would be the discovery because it is basically two-fingers up to the valued input of the above people that up until then felt important.

[paulears]

Ben - to be honest, it's a really rubbish question in real life, and a pretty bizarre one for a dissertation! The reason being quite simple. The question is subjective, not objective, and I'm amazed they've approved such a weird subject, that has no practical use, and the results depend on very unscientific opinion. After all, we've probably all done it, and success depends on your ingenuity or even dexterity - perhaps also slight of hand. You also have to factor in that some people do have the ability to hear things (or see things) you can't.

 

You've also got to look at very difficult areas too - the psychology of what is going on. Dropping the audio level (or lighting) and then putting it back up again - what happens that convinces them that something has changed?

 

If you really want to pursue this as a study subject, it's going to be hard. Personally, I think you will be stuffed. It's a bad question on a bad subject (after all, you are attempting something that will establish deception and unprofessional behaviour as something we all do?

 

I'd seriously talk to your supervisor and check this has enough legs to run!

[kerry davies]

As a first year psychology essay on perception it would be just about acceptable but if this is the level of a technical degree level dissertation today I really must be more observant when buying breakfast cereals.

 

I disagree with Paul about unprofessional. Creating the conditions for a performer to be at their optimal is our primary purpose, psychology is just one of the tools of the trade.

[paulears]

Sorry Kerry - I meant from the point of view taking the P, with winks to those in the know rather than supporting a fragile artiste - I'd describe the second as professional behaviour, and the former the 'un' version. I've done enough of the latter over the year!

[MarkPAman]

I have to admit, that I've even "fooled" myself on occasions. A little tweek of the eq has made something sound better - until I notice that the eq is bypassed for that channel. I guess I heard what I was expecting to here.

[Bobbsy]

Assuming this is a REAL dissertation about how easy it is to be mislead by your preconceptions about what you believe you will hear, have a look at this video which may prove a very good resource:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ

 

The "audio placebo effect is very real.

 

On the other hand, if the dissertation is just about lying to actors and directors, you're kind on your own.

[Doug Siddons]

Is there a psychology module on the Audio & Music Production course? My only comment is that the use of the DFA button is proportionally related to the length of the sound check.

[BenHeysAudio]

Another question for my dissertation I admit the last question was worded badly.

When a button (or knob or slider) is pressed not affecting any auditoryparameters do people recognize a change in the sound from your professional experience?

 

[ojc123]

No, but they may perceive one. I doubt you'll get much in the way of useful response to either of the questions.