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

[head_unit]

I forgot to mention- I suspend the power cords with sky hooks because I don't want anything in the ground to affect the performance.

So you are subjecting your power cords to all the interference that flies through the air, instead of coupling them to warm Mother Earth? How cruel!!!!

 

[head_unit]

cables

Yeah, we have "choice" to where you buy USB cables, and then they don't work because they are charging-only but not obviously labeled so. But USB-C will save us!! Oh...wait...they don't all transfer data either, grrrr. And they won't all charge at the top rate, #$#%^ (and before anyone pipes up that we get "choice" and "cheaper" well by "choice" we also get "confusion" and cheaper is debatable because if ALL the cables were the same, economics of production would reduce the price)

 

[head_unit]

Back to the thread, I posted at AVNirvana:
My views are that
(a) unless the FTC actually does some enforcement then the rules do not matter
(b) I am going to argue for totally prohibiting ANY ratings (excluding small print) which are not continuous, 20-20k (or maybe 40-20k?) and <=1% distortion. Yeah, some legitimate companies put a peak power rating which might be believable, but so what, that can be put in smaller print that cognoscenti can read. I'm more concerned about snuffing out "3000 watt" $100 cr@p, so irritating. And takes in the ignorant through no fault of their own.
(c) And extending same to autosound/boats etc.
(d) The business about multi channels driven...ya know, why NOT require all channels driven? OK, you can't get that much power out of the wall. Maybe that would be a revolution in its own right. Otherwise, sorry I think the 18% or whatever is half-assed. All channels or just two. If someone actually made a receiver whose power didn't droop as more channels were driven, they could add such a rating as a competitive advantage, just as some rate for 4 ohms and some don't.
(e) I'm also not convinced that this conventional wisdom that all channels are never driven at once is true. I've sure attended some movies where it seemed like they were! Hard data is lacking in this area, unless I've just missed it. Certainly I find it weird that AVRs are somehow excused for drooping their power in a manner which would surely be held up as shoddy in outboard amps. And I'd rather have an AVR that could really do say 7x90 instead of 2x140 drooping to 7x60 or whatever. Even if not clipped, I suspect the better regulated amp could sound better when approaching clipping, and maybe at lower levels besides.

 

[PENG]

(b) I am going to argue for totally prohibiting ANY ratings (excluding small print) which are not continuous, 20-20k (or maybe 40-20k?) and <=1% distortion. Yeah, some legitimate companies put a peak power rating which might be believable, but so what, that can be put in smaller print that cognoscenti can read. I'm more concerned about snuffing out "3000 watt" $100 cr@p, so irritating. And takes in the ignorant through no fault of their own.

Great point, I would add that the word "continuous" should be defined better than just to mean using a "continuous sine wave" such as when reference in FTC (Rule 432) and many manufacturers, without specifying a minimum duration. Same for online/print magazines, what they refer to as "continuous..." tests, its usually a sweep test using a single 1 kHz (e.g. Soundandvision.com), or a 20-20,000 Hz "continuous" sine wave sweep (e.g. Audioholics.com) but in either case the duration for such sweeps would be of short duration, far from being literally continuous.

(e) I'm also not convinced that this conventional wisdom that all channels are never driven at once is true. I've sure attended some movies where it seemed like they were! Hard data is lacking in this area, unless I've just missed it. Certainly I find it weird that AVRs are somehow excused for drooping their power in a manner which would surely be held up as shoddy in outboard amps.

I think you may be right but if and when you do have 7 channel (home use) peaking/maxing out in terms of current demand at the exact same time it would not likely last any longer than a seconds or so, and for such short moment a decent mid range AVRs should be able to handle it without clipping especially when most multi-channel set up would have an active subwoofer or two to take care of the demand from the lowest range such as below 80 Hz. It would be very useful if someone like Gene/Audioholics.com would conduct some tests and publish his findings, using some of the know most demanding BR movies.

Yes I agree it would be nice if AVRs are rated the same, 1,2 or 7 channels driven but if it results in the consumer having to pay much more for mostly power/current reserve that will rarely be used in real world applications then it may not be a good idea. D+M, for example, opted to provide about 70% of the two channel driven rating under 5 channel driven condition, and iirc have been tested to hold roughly true as well with 7 channel driven.

And I'd rather have an AVR that could really do say 7x90 instead of 2x140 drooping to 7x60 or whatever. Even if not clipped, I suspect the better regulated amp could sound better when approaching clipping, and maybe at lower levels besides.

This sounds like a personal choice with no right or wrong.. For me, I'll bet the opposite, and would therefore pick the 2X140 W, 7X60 W and definitely avoid the 7X90 W one but for sure ymmv is golden on this.

the more "regulated" power supply approach adopted by HK in the past did not do well on test benches, their two channel output typically measured so much lower than Denon, Marantz, Pioneer etc., that they also output less under the 5 or 7 channel conditions. This seemed to indicate in such balancing act, the overall outcome is worse. It is understandable, because for class AB amps, the high cost items are the enclosure, power supply, and the heat sinks, so if you spend more of your budget on those items, you have to cut back elsewhere, such as the output devices..

 

[highfigh]

Do you have a link to that article?

I looked and the links I found sometimes called it an urban legend but this was printed in about 1983 and I don't know that anyone thought it was important enough to digitize. I even included 'Audio Magazine' as part of the search.

 

[highfigh]

The masses deserve to have a choice too. If they care about performance, they can do a some research. Even audio professionals may not agree on the criteria anyway.

Not sure what is the point of your FFS paragraph with the hyperbolic straw men; doesn’t justify arbitrary thresholds by unaccountable bureaucrats. And even though there are plenty of reasons why private regulation is better than government regulation in any case, this is audio for god’s sake. It’s not a public good and it’s certainly not going to kill anyone. Since enforcement involves potential for violence, it seems pretty ludicrous for involving that in hifi.

FTC is a monopoly because they don’t allow competing regulations from other organizations which consumers and companies can choose voluntarily. The FTC doesn’t have to earn its budget by out-competing other regulation bodies. Instead, it can initiate violence (even if through proxy) on nonviolent parties engaging in a consensual transaction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, by your thinking, the FCC, Department of Defense, HUD, FICA and others should have competition? FTC is a government agency- when did someone come up with a requirement for them to have competition?

 

[cpp]

The FTC works to protect consumers and businesses alike by preventing unfair, deceptive and fraudulent practices in the market. This work is split across three bureaus, each with its own focus.

• The Bureau of Competition assesses anticompetitive mergers and other potentially anticompetitive practices.
• The Bureau of Consumer Protection aims to protect consumers from unfair, fraudulent and deceptive acts or practices.
• The Bureau of Economics assesses the potential impact of the FTC’s actions on the economy.

Well not requiring amp manufacturers to provide the proper power ratings is basically supporting deceptive practices, something they the FTC are driven to prevent. They can't have it both ways.

 

[cpp]

FCC,

What a crock,. The original purpose of the FCC was largely to oversee telephone monopolies’ interstate services and regulate broadcasting, including management of radio spectrum. They brought about the killing off of big Telco's but let the Cable companies run wild as UNREGULATED, which means no price caps, no rules for cable companies.

 

[highfigh]

What a crock,. The original purpose of the FCC was largely to oversee telephone monopolies’ interstate services and regulate broadcasting, including management of radio spectrum. They brought about the killing off of big Telco's but let the Cable companies run wild as UNREGULATED, which means no price caps, no rules for cable companies.

They deregulated the cable companies but the FCC isn't the monopoly, the carriers they allowed to gobble up the competition are. However, in the areas where they make most of their money, they do have competition- it's the rural, low population areas that have no competition. other than satellite. However, that's changing as more independent providers install towers for reaching people who wouldn't see infrastructure from the major carriers for decades.

Yeah, "Deregulating the cable companies will foster competition"- what a freaking load that was.

 

[highfigh]

The FTC works to protect consumers and businesses alike by preventing unfair, deceptive and fraudulent practices in the market. This work is split across three bureaus, each with its own focus.

• The Bureau of Competition assesses anticompetitive mergers and other potentially anticompetitive practices.
• The Bureau of Consumer Protection aims to protect consumers from unfair, fraudulent and deceptive acts or practices.
• The Bureau of Economics assesses the potential impact of the FTC’s actions on the economy.

Well not requiring amp manufacturers to provide the proper power ratings is basically supporting deceptive practices, something they the FTC are driven to prevent. They can't have it both ways.

Let's let Consumer Report handle it.......

 

[Gmoney]

@gene As of today FTC has 1,041 comments posted!!!

 

[cpp]

Let's let Consumer Report handle it.......

Yep, but ya got to pay $55 a year to read the outcome/reports.

 

[highfigh]

Yep, but ya got to pay $55 a year to read the outcome/reports.

They never got it right in the '70s and '80s when it came to audio equipment. Many of the models they seemed to love were some of the worst when it came to premature detonation, like the Sansui R series receivers, Harman-Kardon 330C, crappy tape decks and others.

Going after Tarpon with that fly rig?

 

[3db]

More hyperbolic straw men. I never said that industry should regulate itself or regulation wasn’t needed. Just not easily corruptible violent regulation. Or do you think lobbying is a conspiracy theory?

Right, really put the hurt on those oil companies we subsidize and fight endless wars for. And the healthcare industry that got worse and pricier the more government regulated them. Good thing the government quashed the ability for individuals to sue industry for pollution so that they could install their employees in the very regulatory agencies overseeing them and write the legislation our representatives read after passing.

Imagine thinking that government should tell people what amplifiers they can buy, or that audio specifications should apply at gunpoint...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ive never seen someone as out of touch of reality. You must be a die hard Trump supporter as all of your arguements you put forth are pointless and only further strengthen the cause for regulation.

 

[cpp]

They never got it right in the '70s and '80s when it came to audio equipment. Many of the models they seemed to love were some of the worst when it came to premature detonation, like the Sansui R series receivers, Harman-Kardon 330C, crappy tape decks and others.

Going after Tarpon with that fly rig?

CR, I know they liked so much of the poor performing stuff , I guess do to price. Odd.
No , that's my bonefish rig, but it does work for small tarpon, snook, reds, small permit.

 

[highfigh]

CR, I know they liked so much of the poor performing stuff , I guess do to price. Odd.
No , that's my bonefish rig, but it does work for small tarpon, snook, reds, small permit.

CR was supposedly looking it from a value/dollar standpoint, but some of the HK and other brands weren't less expensive than others, but the 33C, as an example, was designated with the C because the 330 and 330B blew up. The jokes at our store about the Sansui R series- "They put the output transistors in, to protect the fuses" and when someone asked if we repaired Sansui, one of the guys said "All the time", but the person who had asked didn't quite understand the point.

I started fly fishing a few years ago and when I told some people what I have caught, they were surprised that people fish for species other than Trout and Salmon. I haven't caught any of those, but I have caught a bunch of Smallmouth Bass and an 18" Muskie.

 

[jbiz42]

Ive never seen someone as out of touch of reality. You must be a die hard Trump supporter as all of your arguements you put forth are pointless and only further strengthen the cause for regulation.

There's another straw man. Definitely NOT a Trump supporter; Republicans generally tend to increase the size of government. In fact, Clinton may have done more deregulation than the Republicans who preceded and followed.

 

[jbiz42]

So, by your thinking, the FCC, Department of Defense, HUD, FICA and others should have competition? FTC is a government agency- when did someone come up with a requirement for them to have competition?

Requirement? Of course not, and that's the point. Without competition, what incentive do they have to benefit the consumer? In fact, generally the worse they do, the more funding they receive (which we pay for). The narrative is that they keep needing more money to get the job done.

 

[jbiz42]

Is that what the FTC be telling consumers what to buy or just what an amp can deliver, like the fuel mileage requirement for cars. Or, what ingredient is in a product?

You must be misunderstanding what the FTC rules are on amps are. What do you have against it, how it is tested? Who decides on trhe testing condition? What?

Good questions. By regulating, they inherently decide what customers can and can't buy. But imagine if we had the government oversee every single product. Where does it end? Why shouldn't someone do a little research before buying? Read some reviews. If they can't be expected to do that, how are they allowed to make any decisions in their lives (including voting)? Doesn't make sense, unless one is in a totalitarian state.

The Regulatory-Industrial Complex | Mises Institute

In every administration, the tools of inflation, borrowing, taxation, and regulation are used to transfer wealth from the people to the government.

mises.org

 

[jbiz42]

Do you have a link to that article?

I thought Julian Hirsch wrote for Stereo Review. They definitely didn't lean toward the wacky side. Audio didn't so much, either (remember Don Keele reviews?). Maybe you're thinking of Stereophile.