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

Should the FTC Amplifier Rule Stay Active?

  • Yes. Let's hold manufacturers accountable with Truth in Power

    Votes: 46 90.2%
  • Doesn't Matter. It's never been enforced anway.

    Votes: 3 5.9%
  • No. Let manufacturers boast claims to feed my fragile ego.

    Votes: 2 3.9%

  • Total voters
    51
jbiz42

jbiz42

Junior Audioholic
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.
You actually think cable is deregulated?


Or that price controls work?

 
jbiz42

jbiz42

Junior Audioholic
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.
Totally. Lobbying, revolving doors, political corruption, that's all a myth. Now who's delusional?

Do you have any substantiation at all that regulation works?

And what technical justification is there for these specific rules as opposed to different ones?
 
jbiz42

jbiz42

Junior Audioholic
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.
Who decide what is proper? What if they're wrong? FWIW, THD was shown to be irrelevant to audible perception long ago (maybe as early as the '30s or '40s). Why would anyone want to pay taxes to support irrelevant specifications? Doesn't look like they even paid attention to CEA RS-426 (A or B; both are also someone obsolete, but much better than the FTC drivel).

Government regulation means that enforcement can include violence; you better damn well be sure that the specifications are applicable and correct if you condone violence against someone.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
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.

Inherently decide what consumers can buy? How so, by disclosing needed information that deprives consumers of purchasing crap on the cheap perhaps? How is one to be informed without credible information available to them?
Or, forcing to report that a dozen eggs are small, medium large, extra large, or jumbo? Or you don't like to know if a gas pump is accurately delivering the proper amount compensated for temperature as well?
Maybe we should not have traffic signs, fend for your self?

Reviews? By whom? How credible is it?
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja
Who decide what is proper? What if they're wrong? FWIW, THD was shown to be irrelevant to audible perception long ago (maybe as early as the '30s or '40s). Why would anyone want to pay taxes to support irrelevant specifications? Doesn't look like they even paid attention to CEA RS-426 (A or B; both are also someone obsolete, but much better than the FTC drivel).

Government regulation means that enforcement can include violence; you better damn well be sure that the specifications are applicable and correct if you condone violence against someone.
Not sure there will be any violence if a AMP spec is off. That's a little drastic and a person who does has more problems than is known.. .
 
S

sterling shoote

Audioholic Field Marshall
Attention citizens of these great United States of America! Your country needs YOU to speak out on behalf of consumers and the future of hi-fi audio. The Federal Trade Commission is presently reviewing its amplifier power ratings regulation, or "Amplifier Rule", and we need YOU to participate in the review with citizen public comment by February 16th, 2021 or we may lose this ruling forever.

In this article, Audioholics will show YOU how you can tell the FTC that we need to maintain and modernize stringent standards in manufacturer's published power ratings. Learn how YOU can help protect fellow Americans from false claims and dishonest marketing, and help the industry grow through honest reporting. Find out how YOU may even help update the Amplifier Rule to make it more relevant to today's popular multi-channel amps and receivers. You're just a click away from being one of the great Americans taking action on behalf of your great republic.

View attachment 44389

Read: FTC May Kill Amplifier Rule: Help Keep Consumer Protections in Place

Click here to leave your comment by February 16th, 2021: Trade Regulation Rule Relating to Power Output Claims for Amplifiers Utilized in Home Entertainment Products
Less government regulation. Get your fat government ass out of amp marketing. There are plenty of private electronics standardization association entities which can guide and direct consumers.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
Less government regulation. Get your fat government ass out of amp marketing. There are plenty of private electronics standardization association entities which can guide and direct consumers.
If you look back in history before the FTC was mandated, you would quickly realize that your statement is incorrect.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
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.
The problem with government (ours, at least), is that they never stop finding ways to 'need' more and it has become bloated to the point of being the largest single employer in the country.

Obviously, and it's only in theory, the purpose of these agencies is defined at the outset, but the intent may not be the same.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
You actually think cable is deregulated?


Or that price controls work?

They SAID it was being deregulated.


This one is the reason Clear Channel owns more commercial radio stations than any other and for eliminating any creativity in programming-

 
jbiz42

jbiz42

Junior Audioholic
Inherently decide what consumers can buy? How so, by disclosing needed information that deprives consumers of purchasing crap on the cheap perhaps? How is one to be informed without credible information available to them?
Or, forcing to report that a dozen eggs are small, medium large, extra large, or jumbo? Or you don't like to know if a gas pump is accurately delivering the proper amount compensated for temperature as well?
Maybe we should not have traffic signs, fend for your self?

Reviews? By whom? How credible is it?
Yet more hyperbolic straw men. I never said that consumers shouldn't have guidance, just that it shouldn't come from a monopolistic federal agency (which is not actually permitted by the Constitution).

The fact that the FTC rules misleads consumers by requiring THD disclosure (meaningless for audible performance) and overly simplistic impedance (treating it as a scalar value when it is a multidimensional vector) shows exactly why the Feds shouldn't dabble in this area. They are hopelessly obsolete, and a 10 year renewal only backs that up further.
 
jbiz42

jbiz42

Junior Audioholic
Not sure there will be any violence if a AMP spec is off. That's a little drastic and a person who does has more problems than is known.. .
What's meant by this is that if two parties voluntarily transact for an amplifier which doesn't meet the government criteria (which has been shown to be obsolete and insufficient anyway), they FTC will stop them, using violence if necessary. That is just not called for.
 
jbiz42

jbiz42

Junior Audioholic
If you look back in history before the FTC was mandated, you would quickly realize that your statement is incorrect.
What support is there for this statement?



 
jbiz42

jbiz42

Junior Audioholic
They SAID it was being deregulated.


This one is the reason Clear Channel owns more commercial radio stations than any other and for eliminating any creativity in programming-

Agreed that they said this, but it's always prudent to check to see what actually happened (the weak point of all "well-intentioned" government programs. The anti-trust actions tend to have the opposite effect (like how the drug war increased the drug trade).



 
jbiz42

jbiz42

Junior Audioholic
I'm surprised to see that there is still support for using harmonic distortion as a metric. Sure, it's easy to measure and can be useful for diagnostic work, but it's been demonstrated long ago that it is not relevant for perceptual performance. There are many JAES papers on the subject, here are references to a couple:



So the FTC requirement misleads consumers into mistakenly using THD as a metric. Similarly, the dumbed-down impedance requirement does not take into account reactance (or amplitude nonlinearity). The Audio Critic had a much better test decades ago; I even found a reference on this forum:


With the long duration cycle on the FTC rules which can't possibly keep up with industry, and the existing rules being clearly obsolete, I can help but wonder why anyone thinks this helps consumers.
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja
What's meant by this is that if two parties voluntarily transact for an amplifier which doesn't meet the government criteria (which has been shown to be obsolete and insufficient anyway), they FTC will stop them, using violence if necessary. That is just not called for.
I just don't see any violence because as an EX ; a amp specs at 100 watts and the manufacturers notes 200 watts two people going head to toe or creating harmful situations for a dealer, manufacture or a govt or state entity.
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
I just don't see any violence because as an EX ; a amp specs at 100 watts and the manufacturers notes 200 watts two people going head to toe or creating harmful situations for a dealer, manufacture or a govt or state entity.
If you're caught fudging specs they drag you out into the street and publicly beat you with a stick to send a message.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
What support is there for this statement?



FFS!!!! Did you see the crazy power claims made by manufacturers prior to the FTC?
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top