Is preamp remote volume a deal breaker for you?


I've been looking for a quality active tube preamp with remote volume control. Most high quality tube preamps that are reasonably priced (ie, under $4000) do not come with remote volume. Those that do use the cheap motorized Alps pot (I've had bad experience with Alps), probably because it's cheap and widely available. I've seen some very expensive preamps us this pot, unfortunately. The two very high quality preamps I've read about are the SAS Labs 11A, Don Allens preamp, and Atma-sphere M3, but the designers refuses to implement remote because they believe the sound will suffer. Atma-sphere uses a huge hand assembled remote volume only for there expensive MP1. A preamp without remote is a deal breaker for me. How about you?
dracule1
Remote is a big plus but not quite a deal breaker for me. For the last 20 years, my stero has never been without remote (Krell KRC2 pre, Krell integrated, ARC Ref3, ASR integrated) but recently I switched to all Lamm system with Lamm 2L Reference. I suppose I miss remote control quite a bit but not that badly. The improvement in sound over what I had last certainly was well worth the annoyance. If I come across a remote pre that at least sounds as good as Lamm pre in an all Lamm system, I certainly would be tempted to switch if my budget would allow but I certainly would not accept a remote pre that has inferior sound.
I have a well designed preamp with remote that sounds great...someday I'll replace it with a VERY expensive preamp and at that time I also plan to pay somebody to sit next to it turning it up and down for me at my whim, thus creating a "win win".
My preamp is 3 feet from my listening chair. It can run really long cables (I have 30 feet) without any problem so even though I have a remote in the preamp (it uses a custom built switch for the volume control, which is driven by a motor) I never use it. Compromising the sound on account of a remote feature has never struck me as a good idea- the function of the stereo, IMO, is to sound as close to real music as possible and promote the enjoyment of music on that account.

Its my opinion that the ability to drive long cables is far more convenient than a remote- the entire front end of the system- turntable, CDP and tuner is 3 feet from my chair. I can see if it was all set up between the speakers it would be a pain in the rear. But with the ability to drive long cables also came the ability to obviate the artifact of the cable itself- so the length and cost of the cable has no bearing on the sound of the system. That's a pretty big plus!
"...with the ability to drive long cables also came the ability to obviate the artifact of the cable itself- so the length and cost of the cable has no bearing on the sound of the system".

Ralph, Are you suggesting that Atmasphere owners could sell off those hi-end cables and run down to Radio Shack or Target for suitable replacements? No difference - they all sound the same?
Do be honest, I know of an guy who has Atmasphere preamp and amps. He compared balanced interconnects made by Mogami, I think, and a high end cable manufacturer. He said the latter sounded better to him and bought the high end cable at a considerable cost. I have a hard time believing that with Atmasphere electronics, interconnects don't change the sound. I heard differences in interconnect sound in fully balanced system, although not Atmasphere.

For some people, having your equipment rack next to the listening seat may not be practical and may actually affect the sound from all the reflections from the rack next to you.

I still think a remote properly done will not affect the sound. Why would Atmasphere, or any other high end preamp desingers, have done it with the MP1 if this was not the case?