FTC to Kill Amplifier Rule: Help us Protect it by Feb 16th, 2021!

[jbiz42]

Now you want to get rid of law enforcement? Seriously, volunteer organizations have no legal teeth in which to enforce these standards. Thats why they wont work. Now if you give them legal teeth, it may work but then you'll end up with something similar to the FTC filled with agression. You are hopelessly stuck in a catch 22 situation. You can't have it both ways.

You continue to attribute to me statements I didn't make (straw men); the topic was standards enforcement, not law enforcement.

So your assertion is that voluntary standards organizations don't work?!? Tell that to IEEE and AES... hint: their standards wouldn't exist if that was true.

These voluntary standards are actually more effective and relevant than the FTC rules (which the technical content and their own admissions prove aren't effective).

 

[PENG]

The input for speaker sensitivity is already expressed as 2.83V@8 Ohms as being 1 Watt, but not all correct it when the load is 4 Ohms.

Exactly, that's one of the reasons it should have been specified in current and voltage rating instead of power (Watts). That way we just have to know the minimum impedance of the speaker and we can figure out if the said power amplifier is rated for the needed voltage and current during the impedance peaks and dips and now worry about the Watts.

The way it is now is not easier for consumers to understand, it seems to be easier only because it has been forced fed by the manufacturers from day one. Ask someone how much power does a Revel P208 consume you are going to have all kinds of answers. How many would actual know the answer is, it depends, but then on what?? And that assumes the average consumer do know what a watt is, to begin with.

They need to show the specs in a way that the average child will understand.

If the average child understand even just Ohm's law, he/she should be able to tell an amp rated for:

Max output voltage: 48 V, at <= 10 A per channel
Max output current: 16 A, at <= 30 V per channel

should have no trouble driving a speaker with specs like 4 ohms nominal, 2 ohms minimum, recommended power 50 to 400 W (but then again, it should have been rated in voltage and current too).

Still, applying Ohm's law, 30/2 = 15 A, and so the amp can deliver the current the speaker needs. Since it is also rated 48 V, 10A, it clearly has high enough voltage for the said speaker too.

If the same amp is rated in power output such as 480 WPC then people will end up arguing, some will say yes, some will say no because the speaker has impedance dips below 4 ohms, and some high phase angle etc blablabla...

 

[PENG]

These voluntary standards are actually more effective and relevant than the FTC rules (which the technical content and their own admissions prove aren't effective).

True, but would you agree for those standards such as IEEE's to be even more effective, it would help if regulatory authorities/agencies require the manufacturers to comply with such standards? Example, this happens all the time in the manufacturing, mining and other industries that that governmental agencies (such as OSHA don't always write their own, but reference 3rd parties such as IEEE, IEE, CSA, IEC, UL, ISO, BS (British standards) and many more.

 

[jbiz42]

True, but would you agree for those standards such as IEEE's to be even more effective, it would help if regulatory authorities/agencies require the manufacturers to comply with such standards? Example, this happens all the time in the manufacturing, mining and other industries that that governmental agencies (such as OSHA don't always write their own, but reference 3rd parties such as IEEE, IEE, CSA, IEC, UL, ISO, BS (British standards) and many more.

Sure, from a technical perspective (and your previous post laid much of that out very well). Bureaucracies are generally lagging industry in technical expertise.

My concern with the hybrid approach, just like any other application of mercantilism or corporatism, is that the government is then choosing the winner (AES, CEA, and IEC are the major standards bodies for this type of thing). And there doesn't need to be a single standard; there should be different options for different applications (e.g. max power duration might be different for listeners of chamber music, pop, home theater, etc.).

Similarly, there are many different approaches to quantifying distortion relevant to perception. THD utterly fails in that regard (thus the failure of FTC and other similar approaches), and I would rather have several options (non-coherence, multitone, spectral contamination, r_nonlin, Gm, etc.) and let the market decide over time which works best.

It also stifles innovation in the standards space; if the government has already chosen a standard, there won't be much impetus for a competitive standards body to develop a better standard if they don't lobby as much or don't currently have the favor of the government. And that power (lobbying or revolving doors) is what injects conflict of interest into the whole thing.

 

[PENG]

THD utterly fails in that regard (thus the failure of FTC and other similar approaches), and I would rather have several options (non-coherence, multitone, spectral contamination, r_nonlin, Gm, etc.) and let the market decide over time which works best.

I wouldn't go that far (about utterly..), but then I guess that's why I am still considering the AHB2 even when I have too many amps already. Whether THD utterly fails or not, the AHB2 has it and noise so low, and SNR so high that it really doesn't matter.

 

[jbiz42]

I wouldn't go that far (about utterly..), but then I guess that's why I am still considering the AHB2 even when I have too many amps already. Whether THD utterly fails or not, the AHB2 has it and noise so low, and SNR so high that it really doesn't matter.

Maybe I'm exaggerating a bit. But I'm referring to this (one of several papers demonstrating the inability of THD to describe sound quality):

Lies, Damn Lies, And Specifications Article By David J. Weinberg

Lies, Damn Lies, And Specifications Article By David J. Weinberg (Chair, AES-DC section), Enjoy the Music.com Review Magazine

www.enjoythemusic.com

http://www.justdiyit.com/documents/2017/04/loudpseaker-nonlinear-distortion-measurements.pdf

 

[M Code]

3) Even that 66 lbs monster super receiver Marantz 2600 would only be 400W into a 4 Ohm resistor.
4) Stopping using the vague, misleading, confusing term "continuous", instead specify the duration in seconds, minutes and hour that the ratings are based on at say room temperature (or something like 25 deg C) assuming the unit is ventilated according the the manufacturer's recommendations.
Again using the Marantz super receiver as example, it passed the 1/3 full output, 1 hour preconditioning test but I am almost 100% sure it will not pass a full power 1 hour test so the "continuous" rating is misleading at best.

The way amplifier outputs and loudspeaker's power ratings of all sorts, such as "recommended 25-100 W, power handling 400 W, maximum power 400 W etc., kind of rating are not very useful (useful to an extent) for the consumer to size the amplifier they can afford. I think Dennis Murphy would agree with me on this.

A couple of additional points..

• The Marantz 2600 unit weighed in @ 58 LBs
• The original FTC statue (1973) required the 1/3 power for 1 hour for preconditioning
• Rated power output measurements were done @ 20Hz, 1kHz and 20KHz continuously for 5 minutes each

Bottom-line..
The secret of the Marantz 2600 power output section was it used the patented stagger-finger heat sinks in a temperature sensitive, servo-controlled extruded heat tunnel. This unique, design was well-known as it was also used in the Marantz pro-audio 510 component amplifier that powered many famous rock groups including CSNY, Rhonstadt, Steve Miller, Jackson Browne and the Eagles. In fact the Eagles' concert road system used 75 of the 510 amplifiers, also the Marantz 2600 was rated conservatively and some units put out almost 500W per channel in 4 Ohms.

Just my $0.02...

 

[PENG]

A couple of additional points..

• The Marantz 2600 unit weighed in @ 58 LBs
• The original FTC statue (1973) required the 1/3 power for 1 hour for preconditioning
• Rated power output measurements were done @ 20Hz, 1kHz and 20KHz continuously for 5 minutes each

Bottom-line..
The secret of the Marantz 2600 power output section was it used the patented stagger-finger heat sinks in a temperature sensitive, servo-controlled extruded heat tunnel. This unique, design was well-known as it was also used in the Marantz pro-audio 510 component amplifier that powered many famous rock groups including CSNY, Rhonstadt, Steve Miller, Jackson Browne and the Eagles. In fact the Eagles' concert road system used 75 of the 510 amplifiers, also the Marantz 2600 was rated conservatively and some units put out almost 500W per channel in 4 Ohms.

Just my $0.02...

Funny I also have a couple of points..
First of all the weight, 58, or 66 lbs we'll never know unless we weigh one but based on the following:

• Owner's manual: unit alone 60.3 lbs. (North America model)
• Service manual: unit alone 66 lbs. (North America model), and 60.3 lbs (European model)

On the power related specs:

• Storage caps: 2X7,200 uf per channel, not a whole lot but they are 105 V rated, so this thing can output pretty high voltage for sure.
• The 400 W, 4 Ohm continuous rating is based on test for 45 minutes maximum. That is good, afaic, 45 minutes is longer than needed, for real continuous rating one should look to the likes of Krell, McIntosh, Passlab's at the minimum, if not Boulder and Goldmund's.

 

[M Code]

Funny I also have a couple of points..
First of all the weight, 58, or 66 lbs we'll never know unless we weigh one but based on the following:

• Owner's manual: unit alone 60.3 lbs. (North America model)
• Service manual: unit alone 66 lbs. (North America model), and 60.3 lbs (European model)

On the power related specs:

• Storage caps: 2X7,200 uf per channel, not a whole lot but they are 105 V rated, so this thing can output pretty high voltage for sure.
• The 400 W, 4 Ohm continuous rating is based on test for 45 minutes maximum. That is good, afaic, 45 minutes is longer than needed, for real continuous rating one should look to the likes of Krell, McIntosh, Passlab's at the minimum, if not Boulder and Goldmund's.

Hmm..
Can't comment on the weight differences, there should be very minor difference between the USA/CSA and Euro models maybe 2 pounds max for different power cord/connector and export carton packing.. To validate I could weigh my 2600, but then again I would have to pull it out of the rack.. No idea where U got 45 minutes max, preconditioning is done for 1 hour @ 1kHz, note in later revs to the FTC statue they did allow a unit to accumulate the 1 hour time including cycling ON/OFF.. For my 2600(serial # 0002), I do have some power output measurements done many years ago by the Marantz R&D team, I will look for them in my tech info stash. But 1 thing I can confirm the 2600 has incredible power output and has driven reliably any loudspeaker I have connected including electro-statics by Quad. Though the 2600 was assembled in Japan, the output amplifier tunnel/circuit was designed in the USA by the Marantz pro-audio design team. Also the 2600's MM phono circuit had great specs, and was designed in the USA, also the 2600 had an excellent 5 gang, quartz-lock FM tuner. Each tech section of the 2600 for the amplifier, preamplifier, and tuner were all available in separate components sold by Marantz under the Esotec series.

Just my $0.02...

 

[panteragstk]

Thanks for your efforts in this arena no matter what happens but wow such an increase, who woulda thunk with the internet ?

The internet can be a VERY powerful tool if used properly. Sadly, a lot of folks use it for stupid.

 

[PENG]

Hmm..
Can't comment on the weight differences, there should be very minor difference between the USA/CSA and Euro models maybe 2 pounds max for different power cord/connector and export carton packing.. To validate I could weigh my 2600, but then again I would have to pull it out of the rack.. No idea where U got 45 minutes max, preconditioning is done for 1 hour @ 1kHz, note in later revs to the FTC statue they did allow a unit to accumulate the 1 hour time including cycling ON/OFF.. For my 2600(serial # 0002), I do have some power output measurements done many years ago by the Marantz R&D team, I will look for them in my tech info stash. But 1 thing I can confirm the 2600 has incredible power output and has driven reliably any loudspeaker I have connected including electro-statics by Quad. Though the 2600 was assembled in Japan, the output amplifier tunnel/circuit was designed in the USA by the Marantz pro-audio design team. Also the 2600's MM phono circuit had great specs, and was designed in the USA, also the 2600 had an excellent 5 gang, quartz-lock FM tuner. Each tech section of the 2600 for the amplifier, preamplifier, and tuner were all available in separate components sold by Marantz under the Esotec series.

Just my $0.02...

Preconditioning is 1 hour, but as you know that's at 1/3 full power at the time (later changed to 1/8). At full power it obviously can't go as long, that's why 45 minutes maximum per Marantz owner's manual. By the way this thing has a fan, you should be able to see it at the back right?

If you go with the service manual, it was only 20 minutes.

If you still have the Owner's manual, it should be on page 25:

Service manual, page 7

 

[M Code]

Preconditioning is 1 hour, but as you know that's at 1/3 full power at the time (later changed to 1/8). At full power it obviously can't go as long, that's why 45 minutes maximum per Marantz owner's manual. By the way this thing has a fan, you should be able to see it at the back right?

If you go with the service manual, it was only 20 minutes.

If you still have the Owner's manual, it should be on page 25:

View attachment 44787

View attachment 44788

Service manual, page 7

View attachment 44790

I cannot see a real world use case driving the 2600 for 45 minutes continuously @ full power output into either 8 or 4 Ohms..... The 2600 thrives on high power output but as the original FTC statue stated the actual power measurement is only 5 minutes @ 20Hz, 1kHz and 20kHz after preconditioning for an hour @ 1/3 rated power output. The reason for the 1/3 power output for preconditioning was that put a very high stress on the power supply.. And as U know even today some brands install fans just for the power supply...

Just my $0.02...

 

[Pogre]

So you guys got me looking and I found a pretty good image of the the insides of the 2600. This thing really is a beast.

 

[Mikado463]

So you guys got me looking and I found a pretty good image of the the insides of the 2600. This thing really is a beast.

View attachment 44797

ah yes, back when men were men and mini skirts ruled !!

 

[ryanosaur]

ah yes, back when men were men and mini skirts ruled !!

So when Men wore Kilts?

 

[Mikado463]

So when Men wore Kilts?

whatever floats your boat ! but being a Scot, I get it .....

 

[Gmoney]

Don't forget Halter-Tops, Hip-hugger jeans and huarache sandals..

 

[panteragstk]

ah yes, back when men were men and mini skirts ruled !!

Good Lord man. How much ammo can you give us?

 

[mtrycrafts]

... but then again I would have to pull it out of the rack.. ...

If you have the room, perhaps one of those airline luggage scales might work in place?

 

[mtrycrafts]

So you guys got me looking and I found a pretty good image of the the insides of the 2600. This thing really is a beast.

View attachment 44797

Where are those exquisite heat sinks that was mentioned? I am thinking a good sized heat sinks.