Why no remote?


I'm looking to add a tube preamp to my system. I've narrowed it down to a couple....AI Modulus IIIa (which I am leaning towards) and a CJ. The CJ comes with a remote; the AI doesn't. It's frustrating that AI doesn't offer remote control because, for sound, I really prefer it; however, at the same time, I really want a remote (yes, I'm lazy once I sit down to listen). Can someone explain why a company would not offer remote control?

Second, is there a way around this? Creek OBH-10? Others? Would this affect the sound in any way?

I'd also appreciate any other suggestions for tube preamps that are similar to the AI.

Thanks,
Dave
milo
I think of having a good full-function remote as more than just a convenience. It can actually improve the listening experience by permitting correct volume adjustment at the listening position, something hard to judge accurately when you'd otherwise have to closely approach or go behind the speakers to make a change, as I would. Plus having a remote that controls source selection has helped with component and cable auditioning by allowing me to construct test set-ups where I can instantaneously A/B things with the push of a button from the chair. If you are anal about absolute phase, a preamp and remote that allows this parameter to be switched on the fly could be the only way to go, because the difference can be frustratingly obscured when you're walking about or standing in between your speakers.

In the case you're looking at, I actually suspect it's likely AI's small size as a company, as much as anything else, that prevents them from offering both a remote *and* a competitive price on their product, the basic engineering of which was done quite a while ago now. A company that makes and sells a sizably higher volume of production every year like C-J will have a natural edge with such considerations. As far as sound goes, I think enough has been learned about implementing remote control at this point that it is probably not correct to say that, all other considerations being equal, a non-remote preamp will still always sound better than one with a remote, though we obviously pay to have it done right. As a matter of fact, I think that the demand for remote contral has actually prompted advances in the design and implementation of volume-attenuation systems within preamplifiers, away from potentiometers (with or without motors) and coarse stepped-attenuators, toward discrete fixed systems emloying conceptually-simple but complex-in-execution resistive or shunt designs that raise prices, but offer theoretically improved sound quality over their adjustment range.
Ok - I admit that I am biased because I own one, but the Ayre pre-amps(K-1 and K-3) have a remote control option that employs the use of a stepper motor and a drive belt that turns a gear on the volume control shaft. This is a very elegant solution, as it moves the control mechanically without degrading the signal because its totally outside of the signal path.
Having turned volume up or down during listening of one piece of music on quiet or loud parts is just another way to compress the signal imho.
I have a non remote BC3 preamp but am considering a CD player with volume control and using one output for remote and the fixed for (I would assume) non compromised listening. Any potential problems with this config?