Is preamp remote volume a deal breaker for you?

Preamp remote and source remote are two different things.

Not only do I eschew remotes, my sources and preamps (both are single input/output so on occasion I'm switching cables) are in a totally separate room than my amp and speakers. Getting up is not a bother. I tend to listen to my CDs/LPs all the way through. Ultimately I'm going to have to get up and flip an LP, reload a tape, or change a CD at some point. I know my media and room well enough that I can set the volume instantly.

In general volume control switches and implementing remote controls are two of the weakest points in preamp design. Designers have to make critical decisions to meet certain price points. The volume switch and how the remote function are designed/implemented are a couple of them. Good switches cost money (heck even bad ones do these days). The work involved in designing/implementing a remote function that doesn't negatively impact the sound, and all but the very best (translated = most expensive) do, involves time and money (even if you are using some off the shelf product like Bent) bumping costs up even more. Some designers cannot justify those costs.

It becomes a trade off for most consumers too. What features/functions do we prioritize in a preamp design? What are we willing to give up to get something we want.

Here's my preamp history:
Onkyo P304
Adcom GFP 565
Melos SHA 1
Rowland Consonance
Adcom GFP 750
Pass Aleph P w/remote
Pass X1
Pass XP-10

Starting with the Rowland, I've had a remote.
Since then, I don't audition anything without a remote.
Why would I? The XP-10 sounds better than anything I've had in my system, ever.
I said the same thing about my X1, until I heard the XP-10.
My preamp is once again the premier component in my system.

If I didn't have a remote I'd hear even less of what people (i.e. girlfriend) attempt to say to me when I'm listening to my stereo. I've been to the Alps, and I'm staying.

I'm with Albert Porter. Sound quality first, convenience second.

I think having remote control is almost essential for sound quality reasons. The ideal volume setting changes from recording to recording, and even from track to track, and often lies in a surprisingly tight range. Finding that volume is next to impossible without remote volume control. The ideal channel balance is easier to find without a remote, but, even that task is easier with remote. I frequently make small channel balance adjustments, which are very easy to do with a remote.

I also don't like ANY control that don't allow for small incremental change. For setting balance, one really needs steps as small as .5 db or smaller. One cannot reliably hear .5 db as a change in absolute volume, but that small a change in one channel can easily be heard as a change in balance.