No, they don't have to do all these things. They do have to own their specifications. If the FTC audited them (or whatever the FTC does--probably just an initial inquiry to begin with), they would be expected to show how their product does what they claim it does, either by analysis or by testing. The FTC, if it operates as most U.S. government agencies do, would probably not do the testing themselves--they would require it of the manufacturer, or require that the manufacturer have it done by a third party. They would not be required to publish those tests, or defend themselves in the court of public opinion. They may need to do those things to save the product in the market, but that's a business decision.
This amp does not carry the burden of representing any particular amp topology, just as the Aiyima does not carry the burden of representing Class D. The Aiyima at most carries the burden of representing $70 power amps, and in that category, expectations should be appropriately moderated.
Let's consider an alternative example more meaningful than the Aiyima A07. When Buckeye started putting amps together for people using Hypex modules (at similar prices to this GaN amp), there was no claim of being a manufacturer, and the reported specs were referenced specifically to Hypex's published specifications rather than any implication of having done that testing as an assembler. Those Hypex specs have been informed by actual testing, even though implementation issues can still interfere with those specs, and if there was an unexplainable shortfall, it would be Hypex that would be expected to own them. But Buckeye would still be responsible for the implied warranty (that the product minimally does what they say it does). Note that the Hypex modules are as subject to heat management as whatever stuff is inside this GaN amp--Hypex states clearly that their ability to provide any given power depends on thermal management. In the service of amplifying actual music (and with even more headroom with movies), I judged that to not be a problem after reading considerable discussion. Buckeye started as a hobbyist, but Mr. Buckeye has been smart in how he's set his operation up, and that's why he has a pile of my money waiting its turn. I hope it means he gets his PhD without any student debt.
Note particularly that Amir's first look at Buckeye's assembly offered a range of suggested improvements in the implementation. The reason is that Mr. Buckeye approached Amir in that way. But it's not like Amir has published rules on how he needs to be approached to gain such consideration beyond statements buried in posts often deep in threads. Mr. Buckeye was active enough in ASR to get it.
This company doesn't seem to be following that model, and because they shun forums they don't understand how forums can make or break their products. It's a strategic error. But I sort-of understand it. I don't participate in forums about my area of professional expertise for a variety of reasons, one being that when I say something, it gets (wrongly) interpreted as policy. If I ever express even an opinion about a product in my profession's market, I find myself talking to someone who has flags on either side of his or her desk, if you get my drift. Words mean things, and sometimes even words that are not said mean things. I hope this company wakes up, but some care is needed on this end, too, it seems to me.
Rick "not defending either the amp or its maker, but speaking to the choices reviewers make, even online forum reviewers" Denney
