[Vinnie R.]

All,

Just curious about how important remote volume controls are to you.

Please respond to this poll.

Thanks!

[OTL]

It's only of importance to me if it:

- is noiseless
- is not in the signal path
- is not dependant upon "line of sight"
- is compatible with other remotes
- has volume increase/decrease less than 1.5db per step


I'd also suggest including a mute function, or a rapidly increasing attenuation if the "down" button is held for more than a second or two.

[RoadTripper]

How much will having a remote volume control add to the cost of the unit? If all other factors are equal (sound -probably very hard to quantize, cost -easy to quantize) I would naturally prefer a unit with a volume control over against any competing offerings that don't have one.

[kfr01]

In a preamp a remote control is absolutely essential for me.

[JeffB]

For my listening needs a remote is pretty essential.
I desire volume, mute, and power on/off.

[Tweaker]

I wouldn't have another preamp without a remote.

[tom1356]

It's only of importance to me if it:

- is noiseless
- is not in the signal path
- is not dependant upon "line of sight"
- is compatible with other remotes
- has volume increase/decrease less than 1.5db per step


I'd also suggest including a mute function, or a rapidly increasing attenuation if the "down" button is held for more than a second or two.

How could a remote volume control not be in the sgnal path?

[roymail]

I agree with most of the posts so far especially tom1356 and Seminarian.  However, I think that overall, the $$$ factor will be the most important concern.  That's assuming that this amp is everything we've come to expect from RWA... which I'm certain it is.

-- Roy

[OTL]

Three options of many are:

- Motor driven (moves the attenuator shaft, click, click. click)

- Logic that selects the next increase/decrese of discrete attenuation (re:Muse Model 3)  Very difficult/costly to implement, but sonically a very desireable solution.  E.g: how many steps?  24?  48?  96?  128?

- Digital volume control that would require A/D and D/A conversion.  Way too much complexity for the desired overall effect.

The determining factors are isolation of induced noise, sonic improvement and obviously increased cost.

Although this is a laudable goal, it is certainly not a trivial task when combined with less than 1.5db steps, quiet between volume steps and a muting function.

These factors just might be why you don't see this type of functionality on "reasonably priced" preamps.  But then again, this is just MHO.

OTL.

[kfr01]

- Motor driven (moves the attenuator shaft, click, click. click)

I, for one, don't care about motor noises; just the basic functionality of a volume control that allows me to relax w/o getting up to turn different music down.

[OTL]

Don't confuse motor "noise" with the ability ot the motor to move something "precisely".  

In very short order I can get a Radio Shack motor to rotate a shaft.  But, if I want that motor to respond to a remote control and move in a very precise increment, in two directions, in very precise amounts, this is a horse of an entirely different color.

[Jon L]

I used to think remote volume control was no big deal for me and lived with preamps and CDP's without remote volume for long times.  

Then I got a CDP with remote digital volume control, then another CDP with remote analogue volume control.  It dawned on me finally how much more musical enjoyment I can get by being able to set the "absolute right volume" from my seat.  

Then I went with full audio PC with remote wireless LCD panel.  I now control EVERYTHING from my couch.  Mundane things like volume and skip/pause are a given.  But I now can access every song I own right from the seat and set the right volume level for each song.  There is NO going back.

So, in the end, I strongly believe in remote audio PC control, but for your purposes, Vinnie, I would not want your own remote volume, which will add to the cost too much, and NOT necessary to those who already have remote volume control capabilities from the audio PC, source CDP/DAC, etc.

[SET Man]

Hi all,

   Well, the only remote I have in my main system is for the Sony CD/SACD changer.

   If you love and can't live without remote volume control than you will hate my pre-amp.... it got a dual mono step ladder type volume control. So, there is no remote and not just that I have to turn 2 knobs to change the volume... left than right....  not to mention having to walk a whole 8 feet to the do that  


   Well, than again I'm in for the sound and of cause it won't hurt to have some excercise right?

Take care all,
Buddy

[konut]

I own a Creek OBH-12 which is a passive remote attenuator. It is essential. As long as I can control volume by remote, thats all thats really essential. Everything else is usually a set and forget function.

[Bemopti123]

For what I have experienced with volume remotes, there are plenty but the real solidity and accuracy in control, I have not experienced with a statement level preamp.

Now, I happen to like heavy, tube based preamps and I have seen very few exemplars that satisfy my sense of accuracy and control, along with the convenience of remote.

I once have had a Creek OBH remote sensor with a different preamp....it was convenient for sure, but I somehow felt that there was a loss of fidelity with more circuits along the way to the amp.

So there am I along with Buddy on using a preamp with double step ladder type attenuators along the way, direct, short signal path, less electronics on the original signal path, just two tubes per channel and no tape monitor looping and entail circuits to add distortions...presentation is awesome, but to the level of being ruthless on its performance.

[mcrespo71]

I went without a remote control for over 10 years on the various iterations of systems I owned.  However, last year I finally had a remote volume control on the integrated I own and there is no way I'd go without a remote now.  NO F******* Way!

[mcrespo71]

For what I have experienced with volume remotes, there are plenty but the real solidity and accuracy in control, I have not experienced with a statement level preamp.

Have you ever tried a Placette Passive Pre?  That has more accuracy and gradations in control than any preamp I've ever played with.  It's remote based.

[Bemopti123]

For what I have experienced with volume remotes, there are plenty but the real solidity and accuracy in control, I have not experienced with a statement level preamp.

Have you ever tried a Placette Passive Pre?  That has more accuracy and gradations in control than any preamp I've ever played with.  It's remote based.

I have not.  I am afraid of doing a passive, especially because my preamp is at heart passive, but with an outstanding active section...I doubt that the Placette or any passives will provide me with the dynamics of the First Sound.

Not that I am itching to swap preamps anytime soon...actually, I could make some money if I wanted to, but to my FS Paramount I think I am sort of married for life.  

PS:  it having me go back and forth to change gain gives me what little exercise I even get.

[tom1356]

For what I have experienced with volume remotes, there are plenty but the real solidity and accuracy in control, I have not experienced with a statement level preamp.

Now, I happen to like heavy, tube based preamps and I have seen very few exemplars that satisfy my sense of accuracy and control, along with the convenience of remote.

I once have had a Creek OBH remote sensor with a different preamp....it was convenient for sure, but I somehow felt that there was a loss of fidelity with more circuits al ...

You can have it all. I have a remote controled motor turning a Seiden switch in a TVC passive pre. Bent audio sells them.

[kyyuan]

This one was mentioned before.

What about the re-released version of the Welborn Ultrapath preamp?  Anyone tried it?  It's battery based and has a stepped attenuator (non-ladder type) with remote.