I read in !emc-pstc that [email protected] wrote (in <14f.143ddef3.2ab9 [email protected]>) about 'CE Marking for Passive speakers' on Wed, 18 Sep 2002: > In a message dated 9/18/02 4:40:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: > > >> >>>Have you looked at a properly-labelled loudspeaker? Or the spec for >> a >> pair of headphones? Electrical ratings in there!<<<< > > > I own four sets of passive loudspeakers, a passive subwoofer and two pairs > of headphones. I don't know which, if any of them are "properly > labelled", > but none of them carry a voltage rating - which is what the scope criteria > of the LVD considers. I'm sorry, but I'm ignorant of what EN 60065 says > on > the subject. Is a voltage rating required on passive loudspeakers?
No, but that is irrelevant. If a hazardous voltage can occur at the input, there are requirements to be met. If not, the product conforms by default. This is no different from any other case of 'conforms by default because the controlled feature is not present'. An example would be a TV without a stand, which does not have to conform to the requirements for the stand! > > >>>>I cited EN60065 and the EMC Guidelines document.<<<< > > Which brings up an interesting question....can we assume that the scope of > an EN standard is harmonized with the scope of a Directive? For example, > if an EN standard includes requirements for a specific product (case in > point, passive loudspeaker), and the EN standard is listed in an Annex of > the LVD, is this grounds to conclude that the product is "clearly covered" > under the LVD? I believe the answer is no. I doubt that what you believe is relevant. > > I think we should be careful to remember that it is the Directive that > establishes the legal scope of CE marking application and the EN standard > is > a voluntary instrument that can be used to establish compliance at the > manufacturer's discretion. Yes, but you can't pick out bits that you choose not to comply with. If you don't apply the standard, you have to show conformity another way, which is usually much more difficult. But why take the hard route? It isn't as if it was *difficult* to conform and apply the CE mark. If it involved costly testing, I could understand the reluctance, but it doesn't. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"
