Are you a Verificationist about audio?

05-17-12: Mrtennis
the problem with the distinction raised in the thread is that corroboration or verification is not proof.

thus the verification of a perception does not mean that that which is verified is true.

MrT - We've had this conversation approximately 1 million times. The last time was on the Magic thread, when you said...

...I have concluded that since perception is unreliable and it is the means of interacting with our stereo system, all objective considerations, and arguments are academic.

And I said...

[That] is the conclusion you ALWAYS come to, no matter what is being discussed. It goes like this...

1. Knowledge must be certain.
2. Perception cannot be certain.
3. Therefore, perception is not knowledge.

This little syllogism, which encapsulates your Ideology of Skepticism, is presented by you so frequently here on A'gon that it is beginning to look like stereotypy.

Fire with fire, stereotypy with stereotypy.

Bryon

Say what dude!!

Ah Bryon, another great question pondering the imponderables, so to speak, since consensus would appear to be difficult but in the end worth the endeavor.

I would consider myself a 'verificationist' in as much as I put my trust in things not to blow up, short out, or commit some other kind of catastrophic failure upon turn on. Thank goodness for UL. Beyond that, I'm content to try things that my own, lying ears perceive to be for the better in my musical appreciation regardless of whether or not it has been thoroughly vetted to the satisfaction (if attainable at all) of any cadre of rejectionists, no matter how adamantly they insist and semantically twisted they present their arguments.

Granted, there is a limit to what is doable, attainable and repeatable that would beg human ken to adopt as conventional wisdom. If it neither breaks my legs or picks my pocket then what is all the fuss about when sharing what one thinks to be an improvement with others?

I've gotten beyond that some time ago but do enjoy the thrust and perry of the truly talented out there (you know who you are) as they lay out a rational and reasonable argument that we don't know everything yet and to simply trust our ears as to what works and reverse engineer the point, or possibilities.

All the best,
Nonoise

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.

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".