[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 247 (Friday, December 22, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81232-81240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-32392]
[[Page 81231]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part VIII
Federal Trade Commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
16 CFR Part 432
Trade Regulation Rule Relating to Power Output Claims for Amplifiers
Utilized in Home Entertainment Products; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 247 / Friday, December 22, 2000 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 81232]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 432
Trade Regulation Rule Relating To Power Output Claims For
Amplifiers Utilized in Home Entertainment Products
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``Commission'' or ``FTC''),
pursuant to section 18 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, issues
final amendments to its Trade Regulation Rule on Power Output Claims
for Amplifiers Utilized in Home Entertainment Products (``Amplifier
Rule'' or ``Rule''). The Commission amends the Rule to: exempt sellers
who make power output claims in media advertising from the requirement
to disclose total rated harmonic distortion and the associated power
bandwidth and impedance ratings; clarify the manner in which the Rule's
testing procedures apply to self-powered subwoofer-satellite
combination speaker systems; and reduce the preconditioning power
output requirement from one-third of rated power to one-eighth of rated
power. This document constitutes the Commission's Statement of Basis
and Purpose for the amendments.
EFFECTIVE DATES: This Rule is effective on February 20, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the amended Rule and the Statement of
Basis and Purpose should be sent to the Consumer Response Center,
Federal Trade Commission, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.,
Washington, DC 20580.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Murphy, Economist, Division of
Consumer Protection, Bureau of Economics, (202) 326-3524, or Neil
Blickman, Attorney, Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer
Protection, (202) 326-3038, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, DC
20580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Statement of Basis and Purpose
Part A--Introduction
This document is published pursuant to section 18 of the FTC Act,
15 U.S.C. 57a et seq., the provisions of Part 1, Subpart B of the
Commission's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 1.14, and 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.
This authority permits the Commission to promulgate, modify, and repeal
trade regulation rules that define with specificity acts or practices
that are unfair or deceptive in or affecting commerce within the
meaning of section 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1). The
Commission undertook this rulemaking proceeding as part of the
Commission's ongoing program of evaluating trade regulation rules and
industry guides to determine their effectiveness, impact, cost and
need.
The Amplifier Rule was promulgated on May 3, 1974 (39 FR 15387), to
assist consumers in purchasing power amplification equipment for home
entertainment purposes by standardizing the measurement and disclosure
of various performance characteristics of the equipment. On April 7,
1997, the Commission published a Federal Register Notice (``FRN'')
seeking comment on the Rule as part of an ongoing project to review all
Commission rules and guides to determine their current effectiveness
and impact (62 FR 16500). This FRN sought comment on the costs and
benefits of the Rule, what changes in the Rule would increase its
benefits to purchasers and how those changes would affect compliance
costs, and whether technological or marketplace changes have affected
the Rule. The FRN also sought comment on issues related to the Rule's
product coverage, test procedures, and disclosure requirements.
The comments in response to the FRN generally expressed continuing
support for the Rule, stating that it has given consumers a
standardized method of comparing the power output of audio amplifiers,
and has created a level playing field among competitors. The comments
also suggested that there have been technological and marketplace
changes that may warrant modifications to the Rule's testing and
disclosure requirements, and a clarification of the Rule's
applicability to self-powered loudspeakers for use with personal
computers and home stereo systems. Certain comments also recommended
that the Commission expand the Rule's coverage to include automotive
sound amplification products. On the basis of this review, the
Commission determined to retain the Rule, but to seek additional
comment on possible amendments to the Rule.
The Commission published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(``ANPR'') on July 9, 1998 (63 FR 37238), seeking public comment on
whether it should initiate a rulemaking proceeding by publishing a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPR'') under section 18 of the FTC
Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a. The ANPR solicited specific comment on whether the
Commission should (1) eliminate certain disclosure requirements in
media advertising; (2) clarify testing procedures for self-powered
speakers; and (3) amend certain required test procedures that may
impose unnecessary costs on manufacturers. The ANPR also announced that
the Commission had determined not to initiate a proceeding to amend the
Rule to cover power ratings for automotive sound amplification
equipment. Finally, the Commission published elsewhere in the July 9,
1998 Federal Register a Notice of Final Action announcing a non-
substantive technical amendment to the Rule clarifying that the Rule
covered self-powered loudspeakers for use in the home (63 FR 37234).
The ANPR elicited five comments.\1\ Based on the comments
responding to the ANPR, and on other evidence discussed below, the
Commission published an NPR on July 19, 1999 (64 FR 38610).\2\ In the
NPR, the Commission proposed amending the Rule to (1) exempt sellers
who make power output claims in media advertising from the requirement
to disclose total rated harmonic distortion and the associated power
bandwidth and impedance rating; (2) clarify the manner in which the
rule's testing procedures apply to self-powered subwoofer-satellite
combination speaker systems; and (3) reduce the preconditioning power
output requirement from one-third of rated power to one-eighth of rated
power.\3\ The NPR elicited five comments.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The commenters were: Consumer Electronics Manufacturers
Association (CEMA)(1); Wass Audio~Digital (Wass)(2); Sonance
(Sonance)(3); PHI Acoustics (PHI)(4); and Velodyne Acoustics, Inc.
(Velodyne)(5).
\2\ In accordance with section 18 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a,
the Commission submitted this NPR to the Chairman of the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate, and
the Chairman of the Committee on Commerce, United States House of
Representatives, 30 days prior to its publication in the Federal
Register.
\3\ The Commission solicited public comments on its NPR until
September 17, 1999. In response to a request from the Consumer
Electronics Manufacturers Association, however, the Commission
granted an extension of the comment period until October 15, 1999
(64 FR 51087 (Sept. 21, 1999)). CEMA recently changed its name to
the Consumer Electronics Association.
\4\ The commenters were: EKSC (EKSC)(1); Audio Research (Audio
Research)(2); QSC Audio (QSC)(3); Thomson Consumer Electronics, Inc.
(Thomson)(4); and Consumer Electronics Manufacturers Association
(CEMA)(5). The comments on the Commission's ANPR and NPR are cited
as ``(Name of Commenter), (designated comment number), p.__.'' All
Rule ANPR and NPR comments are on the public record and are
available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room, Room
130, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,
Washington, DC, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except federal holidays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPR, the Commission also announced that pursuant to 16 CFR
[[Page 81233]]
1.20, it would follow expedited procedures in this proceeding, and (1)
publish an NPR; (2) solicit written comments on the Commission's
proposals to amend the Rule; (3) hold an informal hearing, if requested
by interested parties; (4) obtain a final recommendation from staff;
and (5) announce final Commission action in a notice published in the
Federal Register.\5\ There were no requests for hearings in the five
comments received in response to the NPR. The Commission, therefore,
did not hold public hearings in this matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 64 FR 38610, 38614. The Commission stated that using
expedited procedures would support the agency's goals of clarifying
existing regulations, when necessary, and eliminating obsolete or
unnecessary regulation without an undue expenditure of resources,
while ensuring that the public has an opportunity to submit data,
views and arguments on whether the Commission should amend the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part B--Analysis of Amendments
1. Amendment to Required Disclosures Section of the Amplifier Rule
a. Background. Section 432.2 of the Rule requires disclosure of
maximum rated total harmonic distortion (``THD''), power bandwidth, and
impedance whenever a power claim is made in any advertising, including
advertising by retail stores, direct mail merchants, and manufacturers.
In the ANPR, the Commission concluded tentatively that improvements in
amplifier technology since the Rule's promulgation in 1974 appeared to
have reduced the benefits to consumers of disclosure of THD in media
advertising. In the ANPR, the Commission also concluded tentatively
that an insufficient number of consumers would understand the meaning
and significance of the remaining triggered disclosures concerning
power bandwidth and impedance to justify their publication in media
advertising. Accordingly, the ANPR sought comment on whether the
Commission should initiate a rulemaking proceeding to amend the Rule to
exempt media advertising, including advertising on the Internet, from
disclosure of THD and the associated power bandwidth and impedance
ratings when a power output claim is made. In the ANPR, the Commission
tentatively concluded further that the proposed exemption should be
conditioned on the requirement that the primary power output
specification disclosed in any advertising distributed through the
media be the manufacturer's rated minimum sine wave continuous average
power output, per channel, at an impedance of 8 ohms, or, if the
amplifier is not designed for an 8-ohm impedance, at the impedance for
which the amplifier is primarily designed.
Finally, the ANPR explained the Commission's tentative conclusion
that publication of all other power output claims currently subject to
the Rule, including those appearing in manufacturer specification
sheets that are either in print or reproduced on the Internet, should
continue to trigger the requirement that the seller provide the full
complement of disclosures concerning power bandwidth, maximum harmonic
distortion, and impedance, so that interested consumers could obtain
this information prior to purchase.
The Commission received four comments on the tentatively proposed
exemption of THD, bandwidth, and impedance disclosures in media
advertising. CEMA, the principal trade association for the electronics
industry, supported the proposed exemption, including the requirement
that the primary power output specification disclosed in media
advertising be continuous per-channel output at an 8-ohm impedance
(unless the amplifier is designed primarily for a different impedance
level).\6\ Velodyne, a manufacturer of powered loudspeakers, also
supported the exemption of THD and bandwidth disclosures in media
advertising, stating that they contain little useful information for
today's consumer.\7\ This commenter suggested, however, that the
standardized impedance value for power output claims be 4 ohms rather
than the proposed 8 ohms.\8\ No explanation was provided for this
suggestion. Wass opposed elimination of the required THD, bandwidth,
and impedance disclosures in advertising, stating that sellers could
take unfair advantage of the consumer through in-store sales techniques
that obscure the true performance capabilities of an amplifier.\9\
Sonance stated simply that the relationship between power and
distortion is vital to specifying power output, and recommended against
the tentatively proposed exemption.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ CEMA, (1), pp.2-3.
\7\ Velodyne, (5), p.1.
\8\ Id.
\9\ Wass, (2), p.3.
\10\ Sonance, (3), p.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on its review of the comments on its ANPR, the Commission
stated in the NPR that it had reason to believe that the disclosure of
THD, power bandwidth, and impedance in media advertising that contains
a triggering power output claim no longer provided sufficient consumer
benefit to justify the associated increase in advertising costs. The
Commission concluded in both the ANPR and the NPR that very few
amplifiers in today's market generate high levels of THD (e.g., more
than one percent) using the FTC testing protocol. Further, the
Commission concluded that those few amplifiers that do generate
appreciable levels of THD tend to be very expensive vacuum tube designs
that are sold to a specialized group of consumers that may not consider
THD specifications an important consideration in their purchase
decisions. Thus, it did not appear that sales personnel at retail
stores would have an appreciable incentive to mislead consumers
concerning the distortion characteristics of an amplifier. Finally, the
Commission concluded that consumers who are interested in the Rule's
THD, power bandwidth, and impedance specifications would be able to
find such information relatively easily in product brochures at retail
stores or on the Internet.
Commenters on the ANPR did not agree on which impedance value
should serve as the standard for power output claims in media
advertising under the tentatively proposed disclosure exemption. CEMA
endorsed the value of 8 ohms suggested in the ANPR. Velodyne, however,
commented that the standardized impedance value should be 4 ohms. The
Commission concluded in the NPR that, under the proposed exemption, for
amplifiers designed to drive a specific loudspeaker in an integrated
powered configuration, the seller could base power output claims on an
impedance of 4 ohms, if the amplifier is powering a loudspeaker that is
rated at a nominal impedance of 4 ohms. Although the Commission stated
in the NPR that it had reason to believe that the majority of non-
powered loudspeakers are rated at a nominal impedance of 8 ohms, and
that this value should therefore be adopted as the basis for power
output claims in media advertising for separate stand-alone amplifiers,
the NPR solicited further comment on whether the Commission's tentative
conclusion on this issue was correct.
Accordingly, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending section
432.2 of the Rule to exempt advertising disseminated through the media,
including advertising on the Internet, from disclosure of total rated
harmonic distortion and the associated power bandwidth and impedance
ratings when a power output claim is made. The Commission further
proposed that the exemption for advertising disseminated through the
media be conditioned on
[[Page 81234]]
the requirement that the primary power output specification disclosed
in any media advertising be the manufacturer's rated minimum sine wave
continuous average power output, per channel, at an impedance of 8
ohms, or, if the amplifier is not designed for an 8-ohm impedance, at
the impedance for which the amplifier is primarily designed.
Publication of all other power output claims currently subject to the
Rule, including those appearing in manufacturer specification sheets
that are either in print or reproduced on the Internet, would continue
to trigger the requirement that the seller provide the full complement
of disclosures concerning maximum harmonic distortion, power bandwidth,
and impedance, so that interested consumers could obtain this
information prior to purchase.
b. Discussion of NPR Comments. The Commission received four
comments on the proposed exemption of THD, bandwidth, and impedance
disclosures in media advertising. Thomson Consumer Electronics, which
markets audio and video equipment under the RCA and ProScan brand
names, supported the proposed exemption, stating that ``* * * the
consumer typically understands little from these disclosures.'' \11\
Thomson recommended, however, that the Commission monitor developments
once the exemption is in place to ensure that industry members do not
take advantage of the disclosure requirements to inflate power output
claims.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Thomson, (4), p.1.
\12\ Id., pp. 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Audio Research Corporation, a manufacturer of electronic audio
equipment specializing in vacuum tube designs, opposed the proposed
exemption, stating that ``[c]onsumers are a lot more sophisticated than
consumers were when the original rules were issued'' and, therefore,
understand the THD disclosures.\13\ Audio Research agreed, however,
that the Commission should select an impedance of 8 ohms as the basis
for primary power output specifications in the event the Commission
adopts the proposed exemption of THD disclosures in media
advertising.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Audio Research, (2), p.1.
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
QSC Audio Products, a manufacturer of professional audio power
amplifiers, did not believe that the currently required distortion and
power bandwidth disclosures were sufficiently burdensome to justify the
proposed exemption in media advertising. Like Audio Research, however,
QSC supported an impedance value of 8 ohms as the basis for primary
power output specifications in media advertising should an exemption be
adopted, stating that 8 ohms ``* * * is a reasonable value for typical
impedance.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ QSC, (3), p.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CEMA reversed its position taken in earlier comments in this
rulemaking proceeding and opposed the proposed exemption. According to
CEMA, members recently have ``* * * expressed concerns about
inconsistent power output claims in retail advertising for amplifiers
and receivers, especially multichannel products.'' \16\ These members
report that certain relatively low cost multichannel receivers, for
which distortion information in advertising is not disclosed, have
distortion levels well in excess of one percent at rated power.
Although CEMA continues to regard total harmonic distortion levels
below one percent are inaudible to consumers, CEMA stated that levels
above that amount can become significant. As a result, CEMA stated that
``* * * consumers are unable to make accurate price-versus-performance
comparisons for such multichannel audio products.'' \17\ CEMA did not
provide the Commission with any specific examples of such problematic
advertisements for multichannel amplifiers. Nor did CEMA state that
they were aware of any similar advertisements for conventional
monophonic or two-channel stereo amplifiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ CEMA, (5), p.2.
\17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CEMA proposed that the Commission help consumers make ``apples-to-
apples'' comparisons of amplifiers by setting certain minimum
requirements for the various elements of the current THD
disclosures.\18\ CEMA maintained that such standardization would
prevent power output claims from becoming ``* * * qualitative
measurements used by manufacturers (or retailers) to differentiate
products with respect to consumer's perceptions of quality.'' \19\
Specifically, CEMA recommended that total harmonic distortion be
disclosed as ``less than or equal to one percent.'' Under CEMA's
recommendation, ``(M)anufacturers and retailers would continue to be
free to make secondary, qualitative claims of lower distortion in order
to differentiate their products further (e.g., ``0.5% THD,'' ``.01%
THD,'' etc.).'' \20\ CEMA did not indicate what form of disclosure
would be required in the event an amplifier's THD at rated power was
greater than one percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Id., p.3.
\19\ Id.
\20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To further standardize distortion disclosures, CEMA proposed that
the ``power bandwidth'' associated with the rated THD disclosure be the
single frequency 1000 Hz, rather than the customary 20Hz-20kHz. CEMA
commented that ``* * * claims concerning bandwidth, especially claims
about wide bandwidth, could be regarded as qualitative claims to the
consumer.''\21\ CEMA recommended that the Commission adopt 1000 Hz as
the basis for primary power output claims, and allow advertisers to
make secondary qualitative claims, such as ``Ultra-wide Bandwidth'' or
``20-20 kHz'' in advertising or at the point of sale for purposes of
product differentiation.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Id., pp.2-3.
\22\ Id., p. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, in addressing the issue of the appropriate impedance value
for primary power output claims, CEMA stated that `` * * * loudspeakers
today typically exhibit impedances of 4 to 8 ohms.''\23\ CEMA
recommended that primary power output claims be based on an impedance
value of 6 ohms. CEMA did not specify whether most loudspeakers are
rated at an impedance of 8 ohms, 4 ohms, or some impedance value within
that range.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Rule Amendment and Reasons Therefor. Based on its review of the
comments and other evidence contained in this rulemaking proceeding,
the Commission has reason to believe that the disclosure of THD, power
bandwidth, and impedance in media advertising that contains a
triggering power output claim no longer provides sufficient consumer
benefit to justify the associated increase in advertising costs. One
commenter on the NPR supported the proposed exemption. Two other
commenters opposed the proposed exemption, but did not provide any
evidence that consumers typically understand the significance of the
THD, power bandwidth, and impedance disclosures.
Finally, although CEMA had supported the proposed exemption in its
comment on the ANPR, it opposed the proposed exemption in its comment
on the NPR. The basis for this change in position was based on its
allegation that power output claims in certain advertising for multi-
channel theater amplifiers were based on very high levels of total
harmonic distortion. CEMA did not provide any evidence or suggest that
advertisements for conventional monophonic or
[[Page 81235]]
stereophonic amplifiers contain power output claims based on similarly
high levels of THD.
The Commission presented evidence in the ANPR indicating that very
few amplifiers in today's market generate appreciable levels of THD
(e.g., more than one percent) at rated power using the FTC testing
protocol for monophonic or stereophonic amplifiers. The Commission is
publishing elsewhere in this Federal Register a Supplemental Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking that addresses testing and disclosure issues
specific to multi-channel amplifiers such as those used in home theater
applications. The Commission believes that the concerns raised by CEMA
will be addressed more appropriately in that rulemaking proceeding. The
Commission does not believe that CEMA's comment provides a basis for
rejecting the proposed exemption of THD, power bandwidth, and impedance
disclosures in media advertising for conventional monophonic and
stereophonic amplifiers. Similarly, the Commission does not believe
CEMA has provided evidence that would provide a basis for altering the
current requirements governing the format of THD disclosures or the
choice of power bandwidth for power output claims for conventional
monophonic and stereophonic amplifiers.
Two of the commenters on the NPR supported the proposal to base
power output claims on a nominal impedance of 8 ohms, or on the nominal
impedance for which the amplifier is primarily designed. CEMA proposed
a value of 6 ohms, but did not provide any evidence that this value was
more representative of loudspeakers currently in use than was the
proposed value of 8 ohms.
Accordingly, the Commission is amending section 432.2 of the Rule
to exempt advertising disseminated through the media, including
advertising on the Internet, from disclosure of total rated harmonic
distortion and the associated power bandwidth and impedance ratings
when a power output claim is made. The exemption for advertising
disseminated through the media is conditioned on the requirement that
the primary power output specification disclosed in any media
advertising be the manufacturer's rated minimum sine wave continuous
average power output, per channel, at an impedance of 8 ohms, or, if
the amplifier is not designed for an 8-ohm impedance, at the impedance
for the amplifier is primarily designed. Publication of all other power
output claims currently subject to the Rule, including those appearing
in any product brochure or manufacturer specification sheets that are
either in print or reproduced on the Internet, will continue to trigger
the requirement that the seller provide the full complement of
disclosures concerning maximum total harmonic distortion, power
bandwidth, and impedance, so that interested consumers can obtain this
information prior to purchase.
2. Amendment Relating to Self-Powered Loudspeakers
a. Background. When the FRN was published, the Rule did not
specifically mention self-powered speakers as an example of sound
amplification equipment manufactured or sold for home entertainment
purposes. In the FRN, the Commission solicited comment on its tentative
conclusion that the Rule covers: (A) Self-powered speakers for use with
(1) home computers, (2) home sound systems, (3) home multimedia
systems; and (B) other sound power amplification equipment for home
computers. On July 9, 1998, the Commission published in the Federal
Register a non-substantive technical amendment to the Rule to clarify
that the Rule applies to the types of self-powered loudspeakers
enumerated above (63 FR 37234).
In the ANPR published elsewhere in the July 9, 1998 Federal
Register (63 FR 37238), the Commission explained that comments received
in response to the FRN indicated that a clarification was needed
concerning the testing procedure that should be followed in applying
the Rule's continuous power rating protocol to self-powered subwoofer-
satellite combination speaker systems that employ two or more power
amplifiers sharing a common power supply. These comments recommended
two alternative approaches for such combination self-powered speakers.
The first proposed procedure was for power measurements to be made with
all associated channels of both the subwoofer and satellite amplifiers
driven simultaneously to full power using a test tone at the system's
crossover frequency. The second proposal was to allow manufacturers of
such equipment to test the subwoofer and satellite amplifiers
separately over their respective frequency bandwidth.
In the ANPR, the Commission sought comment on its tentative
conclusion that the second procedure was more appropriate, given the
types of power demands combination self-powered speakers would most
likely encounter in actual home use. The Commission received three
comments on its proposal to amend section 432.2 of the Rule to include
a note stating that, for self-powered combination speaker systems that
employ two or more amplifiers dedicated to different portions of the
audio frequency spectrum, only those channels dedicated to the same
audio frequency spectrum need be fully driven to rated per channel
power under section 432.2(a)(2).
CEMA supported the Commission's clarification, stating that this
approach would allow self-powered subwoofers to be rated over their
operating frequency range and at their appropriate impedance value.\24\
Sonance also endorsed the tentative proposal to restrict the power
tests of such equipment to each amplifier's intended operating
range.\25\ Velodyne disagreed with the Commission's proposal and stated
that power rating tests for self-powered combination subwoofer-
satellite loudspeakers should be conducted with all channels operating
simultaneously. It proposed that the amplifiers driving the subwoofer
and satellites should be given a test signal within each amplifier's
typical range, and suggested a combination 60Hz-1,000Hz tone.\26\
Velodyne stated that the power supply was the most costly and critical
component determining an amplifier's continuous power output
capability, and that the primary quantitative measurement of interest
to consumers is the amount of watts the power supply can deliver.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ CEMA, (1), p. 3.
\25\ Sonance, (3), p. 1.
\26\ Velodyne, (5), p. 3.
\27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the comments submitted in response to the FRN and the
ANPR, the Commission tentatively concluded in the NPR that the most
appropriate method of testing self-powered combination subwoofer-
satellite loudspeaker systems under the Rule was to require
simultaneous operation only of those channels dedicated to the same
portion of the audio frequency spectrum. The Commission stated in both
the ANPR and the NPR that it did not have sufficient evidence to
conclude that in-home use, under even strenuous conditions, typically
would place maximum continuous power demands simultaneously on both the
subwoofer and satellite amplifiers at the crossover frequency. Rather,
the Commission concluded in the NPR that such demands would be more
likely to occur in portions of the audio spectrum that would be
assigned primarily either to the subwoofer amplifier or the satellite
amplifier. In contrast, conventional stand-alone stereo amplifiers,
which incorporate left and right-channel amplifiers that must reproduce
signals
[[Page 81236]]
covering the full musical frequency bandwidth, would more commonly be
required to meet simultaneous continuous power demands that are present
in both channels (such as might occur when a pipe organ plays a
sustained pedal tone in the deep bass).
In addition, the Commission stated in the NPR that a simultaneous
power test of both the subwoofer and the satellite amplifiers would,
from a practical standpoint, require a single test signal at the
crossover frequency, or a single combination set of tones, such as the
60Hz-1,000Hz composite signal suggested by Velodyne. The Commission
concluded that the resulting power and THD specifications might not be
valid over the full frequency range over which each amplifier was
designed to operate.
Accordingly, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending section
432.2(a)(2) of the Rule to include a clarifying note stating that, when
measuring maximum per channel output of self-powered combination
speaker systems that employ two or more amplifiers dedicated to
different portions of the audio frequency spectrum, only those channels
dedicated to the same audio frequency spectrum need be fully driven to
rated per channel power.
b. Discussion of NPR Comments. The Commission received five
comments concerning the proposed clarification of testing procedures
for self-powered combination speaker systems. Thomson Consumer
Electronics and Audio Research endorsed the proposal without
qualification.\28\ QSC Audio stated that it had no strong opinion on
the proposed clarification, and was ``* * * willing to support the
proposed regime of loading only one frequency range at a time.'' \29\
QSC noted, however, that a ``rational'' standard for powered speakers
would rate maximum acoustic output, distortion, and frequency bandwidth
as a system, ``* * * without regard for internal details such as
amplifier power and driver impedance.'' \30\ QSC cautioned, however,
that such acoustic measurements initially ``* * * will not be familiar
to consumers and such specifications tend to be overly detailed.'' \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Thomson, (4), p. 2; Audio Research, (2), p. 2.
\29\ QSC, (3), p. 1.
\30\ Id., pp. 1-2.
\31\ Id., p. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two other commenters explicitly favored a testing protocol based on
the acoustic output of the self-powered speaker system over a protocol
limited to the performance of the amplifier(s) alone. These commenters
proposed testing procedures that would apply to all self-powered
speaker systems, whether individual powered subwoofers, powered
satellite speakers, or self-powered combination subwoofer-satellite
speakers that share a common power supply. Specifically, EKSC commented
that the separate testing of amplifiers contained in self-powered
speakers ``* * * does the consumer little good.'' \32\ EKSC proposed a
two-part test procedure that would measure (1) the total harmonic
distortion produced by a self-powered loudspeaker when producing a
sound pressure level of 96 decibels, and (2) the maximum sound pressure
level the loudspeaker could produce without exceeding 10 percent
harmonic distortion. According to EKSC, results from the first test
would allow consumers to compare the harmonic distortion
characteristics of self-powered loudspeaker systems when producing a
standard level of sound pressure. The second test would provide
consumers with comparative information on the maximum sound pressure
self-powered speaker systems could produce prior to the onset of severe
distortion.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ EKSC, (1), p. 1.
\33\ Id., pp. 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CEMA also favored a test protocol based on acoustic output
measurements for self-powered loudspeaker systems. CEMA commented that
an amplifier power rating in isolation ``* * * inherently ignores the
performance capability of the acoustical portion of the system, and
hence is incomplete and inaccurate as a performance comparison tool.''
\34\ CEMA stated that an appropriate acoustical output standard would
measure such performance characteristics as the sensitivity of the
loudspeaker system (expressed as sound pressure output level per input
volt), and the maximum sound pressure output that the system can
achieve within specified frequency bandwidth and distortion limits.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ CEMA, (5), p. 4.
\35\ Id., pp. 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Rule Amendment and Reasons Therefor. Based on the comments
submitted in response to the NPR, the Commission concludes that the
most appropriate method of testing self-powered combination subwoofer-
satellite loudspeaker systems under the Rule is to restrict
measurements to the electrical performance of the component
amplifier(s) alone, and to require simultaneous operation only of those
channels dedicated to the same portion of the audio frequency spectrum.
Three commenters endorsed this procedure or found it acceptable. None
of the commenters recommended any alternative method of measuring the
power output characteristics of amplifiers contained in such self-
powered speaker systems.
Two commenters recommended that the Commission reject any test
protocol limited to measuring the power output of the amplifier alone,
and proposed instead that the Commission develop and adopt a testing
and disclosure methodology based on the acoustic output of the entire
self-powered speaker system. The Commission does not necessarily
disagree that, at least in principle, such a protocol would provide
more complete and meaningful comparative performance information for
consumers than would a protocol limited to the power and distortion
performance of the amplifier(s) alone. The Commission does not,
however, have the necessary expertise and resources to undertake such a
complex and uncertain rulemaking proceeding. The Commission believes
that the development of an acoustic output measurement and disclosure
protocol for self-powered loudspeakers would be, more appropriately,
the responsibility of industry members and their trade associations.
Further, many marketers of self-powered loudspeakers may well
continue to advertise separate power output measurements for the
component amplifiers in these systems before, and even after, any such
acoustic output protocol is formulated. Thus, there would still be a
need to clarify the testing procedure for self-powered combination
satellite and subwoofer loudspeakers under the Rule so that consumers
will not be confused by conflicting power output claims. The Commission
believes, therefore, that the Rule's continuous power output protocol
and any future industry acoustic output protocol could coexist in a
complementary fashion.
Accordingly, the Commission is amending section 432.2(a)(2) to
include a clarifying note stating that, when measuring maximum per
channel output of self-powered combination speaker systems that employ
two or more amplifiers dedicated to different portions of the audio
frequency spectrum, only those channels dedicated to the same audio
frequency spectrum need be fully driven to rated per channel power.
3. Amendments to the Amplifier Rule Preconditioning Requirement
a. Background. Section 432.3(c) of the Rule specifies that an
amplifier must be preconditioned by simultaneously operating all
channels at one-third of
[[Page 81237]]
rated power output for one hour using a sinusoidal wave at a frequency
of 1,000 Hz. The ANPR sought comment on whether the Commission should
amend the Rule to reduce the preconditioning power output requirement
from one-third of rated power to a lower figure, such as one-eighth of
rated power.
CEMA supported reducing the preconditioning power output
requirement to below the current one-third power, stating that the
current requirement is ``beyond what can be expected through normal use
in the home'' and is ``harsh and unrealistic.'' \36\ CEMA claimed that
in order to meet the physical conditions presented by the Rule's
existing preconditioning requirement, manufacturers must design and
incorporate in amplifiers larger and costlier heat sinks.\37\ CEMA
listed several alternative solutions, including operation at idle
during preconditioning, operation at a small fixed power representative
of average power during typical in-home operation, or preconditioning
at one-eighth power. CEMA further stated that the one-eighth power
option ``has the virtue of being consistent with current industry and
international testing specifications.'' \38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ CEMA, (1), p. 2.
\37\ Id.
\38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Velodyne stated that a preconditioning period is not really
necessary, but that the Commission should follow Underwriters
Laboratories' (``UL'') one-eighth power requirement if the
preconditioning requirement is retained.\39\ Velodyne did not provide
any explanation for its conclusion that no preconditioning period of
any kind was necessary under the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Velodyne, (5), p. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wass concluded, from a series of calculations, that reducing the
preconditioning requirement from one-third to one-eighth power would
reduce the thermal stress (expressed in ``watts of heat'' delivered to
an amplifier's heatsink) by approximately 24 percent.\40\ Wass,
however, opposed amending the Rule to provide such a reduction in
specified preconditioning power output because the consumer would get
``a poorer unit.'' \41\ Wass did not provide any evidence, however,
that would allow the Commission to compare the magnitude of the alleged
reduction in amplifier quality with the magnitude of the associated
reduction in manufacturing costs resulting from the one-eighth power
preconditioning standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Wass, (2), p. 2.
\41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, Sonance stated that the one-third power preconditioning
requirement should be retained and enforced evenly.\42\ Sonance saw no
technical problem with the requirement, stating that many generations
of consumer electronic products have been built to this standard.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Sonance, (3), p. 1.
\43\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the comments, the Commission tentatively concluded that
the current one-third power preconditioning requirement imposed
unnecessary costs on amplifier manufacturers and was not needed to
measure amplifiers accurately under conditions that represent actual
in-home use. Accordingly, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending
section 432.3(c) of the Rule by reducing the specified per-channel
power output during preconditioning from one-third of rated power
output for one hour to one-eighth of rated power output for one hour.
b. Discussion of NPR Comments. The Commission received four
comments on the proposed amendment. Audio Research opposed the proposed
amendment, stating that ``the purpose of the original rule-making was
to insure an acceptable level of quality (the \1/3\ power, 1 hour pre-
conditioning test) as well as a reasonable level of static
performance.'' \44\ The remaining three commenters all supported the
proposed reduction in the preconditioning power output requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ Audio Research, (2), p. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
QSC stated that ``we strongly support reducing the pre-conditioning
power level to \1/8\ of rated power.'' QSC noted that this power output
level matches that ``* * * used by safety agencies to assess AC current
draw and component temperature rise, and also corresponds to the
highest likely average program level, where some attempt is made to
limit gross clipping.'' \45\ Thomson Consumer Electronics stated that
the proposed one-eighth power level for preconditioning would provide
``* * * a more realistic condition to that experienced in typical
operation of the amplifier and represents a reasonable manner in which
to precondition for testing.'' \46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ QSC, (3), p. 2.
\46\ Thomson, (4), p. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CEMA reiterated its earlier support for this amendment, citing
attendant reductions in manufacturing and testing costs.\47\ CEMA also
stated that the proposed reduction in the preconditioning power output
requirement would facilitate preconditioning at an impedance of four
ohms, and thus allow more manufacturers of high power amplifiers to
provide realistic power output specifications for this impedance
load.\48\ Finally, CEMA commented that the proposed amendment would
render the preconditioning requirement more consistent with testing
protocols for UL and the European Union, which ``* * * typically
specify amplifier preconditioning at one-eighth of rated power for a
period of less than one hour.'' \49\ In this regard, CEMA proposed that
the Commission reduce the required preconditioning period from one hour
to thirty minutes.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ CEMA, (5), p. 5.
\48\ Id.
\49\ Id.
\50\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Rule Amendment and Reasons Therefor. Based on the comments
submitted in response to the NPR, the Commission concludes that the
current one-third power preconditioning requirement imposes unnecessary
costs on amplifier manufacturers and should be reduced to one-eighth of
rated power. All but one of the commenters on the NPR supported this
reduction. The dissenting commenter was concerned that lowering the
preconditioning power requirement would jeopardize the Rule's intended
purpose of helping assure an acceptable level of quality in the
amplifier market.
The Commission believes that the proposed amendment is consistent
with the original intent of the Rule. The preconditioning requirement
was not imposed as a quality-assurance mechanism that would place
maximum stress on an amplifier's heat dissipation capabilities. This
requirement merely was intended to bring an amplifier to normal
operating temperature and to stabilize its components so that the
subsequent power output tests would provide performance specifications
representative of the performance consumers could expect in normal
operation in the home. Indeed, at the time the Rule was promulgated in
1974, the Commission was not aware that preconditioning at one-third of
rated power would place such severe thermal stress on solid state
amplifiers, particularly high power units operating into a resistive
load of four ohms.
Only one of the NPR comments, and none of the comments received in
connection with earlier phases of this proceeding, recommended a
preconditioning period shorter than one hour. The one commenter that
recommended a shorter preconditioning
[[Page 81238]]
period of thirty minutes did not provide any technological
justifications for the proposed reduction in preconditioning time.
Thus, the Commission does not believe that the Rulemaking record
provides an adequate basis for amending the one-hour preconditioning
period prescribed by the Rule.
Accordingly, the Commission is amending section 432.3(c) of the
Rule by reducing the specified per-channel power output during
preconditioning from one-third of rated power output for one hour to
one-eighth of rated power output for one hour.
d. Additional Preconditioning Amendment. As discussed in Part B(2)
above, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending the Rule to clarify
the manner in which power tests should be conducted for self-powered
subwoofer-satellite combination loudspeaker systems. In reviewing the
technical issues related to this proposed amendment, the Commission
tentatively concluded in the NPR that clarification also was required
concerning the manner in which powered subwoofers should be
preconditioned under the Rule.
Section 432.3(c) of the Rule specifies a preconditioning sinusoidal
test tone of 1,000Hz. The Commission stated in the NPR that most self-
powered subwoofer systems incorporate crossover circuitry that filters
out frequencies above the bass range. Depending upon the crossover
frequency and the steepness of the crossover slope, such crossover
circuitry may severely attenuate a test tone of 1,000Hz and prevent the
subwoofer amplifier from being driven to one-third rated power (as
required by the Rule at the time the NPR was published), or even to
one-eighth of rated power (as required by the amended Rule). Thus, it
appeared to the Commission that testers of self-powered subwoofers
would need to select a preconditioning frequency considerably lower
than 1,000Hz.
The Commission, therefore, tentatively concluded in the NPR that
the Rule should be amended to clarify the preconditioning procedure for
self-powered subwoofers. The Commission also concluded, however, that
any such amendment should not specify the precise frequency of the test
tone that is to be used in preconditioning powered subwoofers. The
Commission stated that powered subwoofers may differ widely in the
portion of the bass spectrum over which they are designed to operate,
and, consequently, there may not be a single preconditioning frequency
that is appropriate for all powered subwoofers. The Commission
tentatively concluded in the NPR, therefore, that testers of powered
subwoofers should have the flexibility to choose for the sinusoidal
preconditioning signal any frequency within the intended operating
bandwidth of the subwoofer amplifier that will allow the amplifier to
be driven for one hour to the required proportion of rated power
output.
Accordingly, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending section
432.3(c) of the Rule by adding an explanatory note stating that for
amplifiers utilized as a component in a self-powered subwoofer system,
the sinusoidal wave used as a preconditioning signal may be any
frequency within the amplifier's intended operating bandwidth that will
allow the amplifier to be driven to one-eighth of rated power for one
hour.
e. Discussion of NPR Comments. The Commission received only one
comment that directly addressed the choice of preconditioning frequency
for self-powered subwoofer systems. Audio Research supported the
proposed amendment, stating that such subwoofers should be
preconditioned ``* * * at any frequency within the claimed bandwidth.''
\51\ Another commenter on the NPR, QSC Audio, stated that powered
speakers should be preconditioned using ``band-limited pink noise.''
\52\ QSC, however, did not distinguish between subwoofers and other
types of powered loudspeaker systems, and did not specify which
frequency ranges should be selected as appropriate band-limited pink
noise test signals. Finally, CEMA and EKSC restricted their comments on
self-powered speakers to the need for acoustic output tests of the
entire speaker system, and did not address the choice of
preconditioning test signal frequency for the amplifiers contained in
self-powered subwoofers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ Audio Research, (2), p. 2.
\52\ QSC, (3), p. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
f. Rule Amendment and Reasons Therefor. Based on its review of the
NPR comments, the Commission has concluded that testers of self-powered
subwoofers should have the flexibility to choose for the sinusoidal
preconditioning signal any frequency within the intended operating
bandwidth of the subwoofer amplifier that will allow the amplifier to
be driven for one hour to one-eighth of rated power output. No comments
stated that this approach was technologically flawed or otherwise
undesirable. One commenter specifically endorsed the proposed
preconditioning amendment. Accordingly, the Commission is amending
section 432.3(c) of the Rule by adding an explanatory note stating that
for amplifiers utilized as a component in a self-powered subwoofer
system, the sinusoidal wave used as a preconditioning signal may be any
frequency within the amplifier's intended operating bandwidth that will
allow the amplifier to be driven to one-eighth of rated power for one
hour.
Part C--Regulatory Analysis And Regulatory Flexibility Act
Requirements
Under section 22 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57b, the Commission must
issue a preliminary regulatory analysis for a proceeding to amend a
rule only when it (1) estimates that the amendment will have an annual
effect on the national economy of $100,000,000 or more; (2) estimates
that the amendment will cause a substantial change in the cost or price
of certain categories of goods or services; or (3) otherwise determines
that the amendment will have a significant effect upon covered entities
or upon consumers. A final regulatory analysis is not required because
the Commission finds that the amendments to the Rule will not have such
effects on the national economy, on the cost of sound amplification
equipment, or on covered businesses or consumers.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601-12, requires
that the agency conduct an analysis of the anticipated economic impact
of the proposed amendments on small businesses. The purpose of a
regulatory flexibility analysis is to ensure that the agency considers
impact on small entities and examines regulatory alternatives that
could achieve the regulatory purpose while minimizing burdens on small
entities. Section 605 of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605, provides that such an
analysis is not required if the agency head certifies that the
regulatory action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Since the Amplifier Rule covers manufacturers and importers of
power amplification equipment for use in the home, the Commission
preliminarily concluded in the NPR that any amendments to the Rule may
affect a substantial number of small businesses. Nevertheless, the
Commission concluded that the proposed amendments would not have a
significant economic impact upon such entities. Specifically, the
Commission stated that the proposed change in the preconditioning
protocol and the proposed exemption of disclosure of THD, bandwidth,
and impedance specifications in media advertising would allow a
moderate reduction in
[[Page 81239]]
amplifier manufacturing and advertising costs that would benefit both
small and large businesses. The Commission also concluded that the
proposed clarification of testing procedures for combination subwoofer-
satellite self-powered loudspeaker systems was the least burdensome
application of the Rule among the alternative proposals suggested by
commenters, and would not have a significant or disproportionate impact
on the testing costs of small manufacturers of such power amplification
equipment.
Based on available information, therefore, in the NPR the
Commission certified under the RFA that the proposed amendments to the
Amplifier Rule, if promulgated, would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small businesses. To ensure that no
significant economic impact was being overlooked, however, the
Commission requested comments on this issue. The Commission received no
comments on this aspect of its NPR. Consequently, the Commission
concludes that a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, and
certifies, under section 605 of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605, that the Rule it
has adopted will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Part D--Paperwork Reduction Act
The Amplifier Rule contains various information collection
requirements for which the Commission has obtained clearance until
August 31, 2002, under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') Control Number 3084-
0105. In the NPR, the Commission preliminarily concluded that the
proposed amendments to the Rule to clarify the manner in which the
Rule's testing procedures apply to self-powered subwoofer-satellite
combination speaker systems, and reduce the preconditioning power
output requirement from one-third of rated power to one-eighth of rated
power, if enacted, would not increase or alter the paperwork burden
associated with the Rule's requirements. The Commission stated in the
NPR that these amendments would not increase the paperwork burden for
businesses because for purposes of performing the tests necessary for
affected entities to make the disclosures required under the Rule
amplifiers must continue to be preconditioned for one hour. In the NPR,
the Commission also preliminarily concluded that the proposed amendment
of the Rule to exempt from media advertising disclosure of an
amplifier's total rated harmonic distortion and the associated power
bandwidth and impedance ratings when a power output claim for an
amplifier is made would reduce the Rule's paperwork burden. Although
the exemption for media advertising would be conditioned on the
requirement that the amplifier's primary power output specification
continue to be disclosed in any media advertising, the Commission
stated that the net effect of the proposed amendment would be to reduce
the Rule's paperwork burden for businesses. To ensure that no
significant paperwork burden was being overlooked, however, the
Commission requested comments on this issue. The Commission received no
comments on this aspect of its NPR.
Thus, the Commission concludes on the basis of the information now
before it that the amendments to the Amplifier Rule will decrease the
paperwork burden associated with compliance with the Rule. As
discussed, the Rule requires disclosures if an advertisement makes a
power output claim. The Commission has estimated that approximately
1,200 advertisements annually would be required to carry the FTC
disclosures. The cost of these disclosures is limited to the time
needed to draft and review the language pertaining to power output
specifications. The Commission has estimated the time involved for this
task to be a maximum of one hour per advertisement, for a total burden
of 1,200 hours.\53\ Because the Commission is amending the Rule to
exempt from media advertising disclosure of an amplifier's total rated
harmonic distortion and the associated power bandwidth and impedance
ratings, the Commission estimates the time involved for the
aforementioned tasks to be a maximum of 45 minutes per advertisement,
for a total burden of 900 hours. Thus, the net effect of the amendment
is to reduce the Rule's paperwork burden for businesses by 900 hours.
In addition, since there were no additional ``collection of
information'' requirements included in the proposed amendments to the
Rule, the Commission was not required to submit them to OMB during this
proceeding for clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 64 FR 36877, 36879 (July 8, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 432
Amplifiers, Home entertainment products, Trade practices.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 16 CFR Part 432 is amended
as follows:
PART 432--POWER OUTPUT CLAIMS FOR AMPLIFIERS UTILIZED IN HOME
ENTERTAINMENT PRODUCTS
1. The authority citation for part 432 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 38 Stat. 717, as amended; (15 U.S.C. 41-58).
2. Section 432.2 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 432.2 Required disclosures.
(a) Whenever any direct or indirect representation is made of the
power output, power band or power frequency response, or distortion
characteristics of sound power amplification equipment, the following
disclosure shall be made clearly, conspicuously, and more prominently
than any other representations or disclosures permitted under this
part: The manufacturer's rated minimum sine wave continuous average
power output, in watts, per channel (if the equipment is designed to
amplify two or more channels simultaneously) at an impedance of 8 ohms,
or, if the amplifier is not designed for an 8-ohm impedance, at the
impedance for which the amplifier is primarily designed, measured with
all associated channels fully driven to rated per channel power.
Provided, however, when measuring maximum per channel output of self-
powered combination speaker systems that employ two or more amplifiers
dedicated to different portions of the audio frequency spectrum, such
as those incorporated into combination subwoofer-satellite speaker
systems, only those channels dedicated to the same audio frequency
spectrum should be considered associated channels that need be fully
driven simultaneously to rated per channel power.
(b) In addition, whenever any direct or indirect representation is
made of the power output, power band or power frequency response, or
distortion characteristics of sound power amplification equipment in
any product brochure or manufacturer specification sheet, the following
disclosures also shall be made clearly, conspicuously, and more
prominently than any other representations or disclosures permitted
under this part:
(1) The manufacturer's rated power band or power frequency
response, in Hertz (Hz), for the rated power output required to be
disclosed in paragraph (a) of this section; and
(2) The manufacturer's rated percentage of maximum total harmonic
distortion at any power level from 250 mW to the rated power output,
and its corresponding rated power band or power frequency response.
[[Page 81240]]
3. Section 432.3(c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 432.3 Standard test conditions.
* * * * *
(c) The amplifier shall be preconditioned by simultaneously
operating all channels at one-eighth of rated power output for one hour
using a sinusoidal wave at a frequency of 1,000 Hz; provided, however,
that for amplifiers utilized as a component in a self-powered subwoofer
system, the sinusoidal wave used as a preconditioning signal may be any
frequency within the amplifier's intended operating bandwidth that will
allow the amplifier to be driven to one-eighth of rated power for one
hour;
* * * * *
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-32392 Filed 12-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P