2. misc-audio
  3. 1280069401

Are you a Verificationist about audio?

A Verificationist about audio believes that...

A statement about audio is valid ONLY IF it can be verified, and it can be verified ONLY IF there is some finite, repeatable, public procedure for determining whether it is true or false.

Verificationism is a major ideological division on Audiogon, particularly on topics relating to cables, power accessories, and miscellaneous tweaks. Verificationists argue that, if a statement about cable x, power outlet y, or tweak z cannot be verified, then the statement is not valid. Anti-verificationists argue that, if they themselves hear a difference between item x and item y, then that is sufficient to make statements about those items valid.

Are you a Verificationist about audio?
bryoncunningham
puerto
372 posts
 
I was going to join in this discussion until I read Chayro's comments. He hit the nail on the head. Verify results in Chayro's room and then take the same components and verify results in my room. It will never be the same. How do you verify under those circumstances? You can verify to you heart's content on a work bench but when does it ever apply specifically to your room? Heck, if there are 50 responses to this thread, there will be 50 different set of circumstances. So if verification is meant to be universal by definition, I say it is impossible.

I'm not a verificationist - just a guy that buys the best he can afford and makes up his mind to enjoy it and nevermind those that have gone further.
jejaudio
110 posts
 
In the immortal words of Senator John Kerry "I was actually for Verificationism before I was against it".

Be mindful, audio-reviewers are like corporations, and we all know, "Corporations Are People".
tholt
550 posts
 
Ant-verificationist all the way. If I hear it (or don't), that's all the verification I need. However, since I am limited to exposure in my system, any "statements" I would make on these things would come with a heavy dose of YMMV.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
byron:

you are accurate in your assessment of my skepticism.

i do repeat the argument you encapsulated so well in a syllogism, because , it has not been definitively refuted.

in addition, there are many topics, or threads, to which skepticism applies.

some of the issues that are raised as threads, are rhetorical, and, like most philosophical arguments, do not have a definitive conclusion.
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,587 posts
 
Skepticism as a contrivance to further an argument can only lead one to doubt the sincerity of the skeptic.

I trust that's not the case else this wouldn't qualify as academic, let alone philosophical, but simply rhetorical.

All the best,
Nonoise
More to discover