[auee]

I have a wish that the high quality tube and solid state headphone amps discussed in this forum such as the Woos, RSAs, etc. should offer remote volume control. Do any others share my desire for this additional feature?

The benefit to me is substantial. It allows much greater flexibility in location of the amp and other components; more than an arms length away from the listening position. I find that I adjust the volume frequently as many tracks on the same album sound better to me at different decibel levels.

 

[atbglenn]

Woo did offer a remote volume control option for the WA2 last year. I'm sure it could still be had if you contact Jack.

 

[tintin47]

I guess I can understand the desire for remote volume if you move the volume around a lot, but I don't really understand that, especially if you are listening to one album. IMO, the dynamics of an album, even between songs, are intentional, especially if it a good recording. I don't like to change that, so I don't really ever change the volume once an album has started, unless I decide that I have it too loud after a few minutes.

On top of that, with most headphones, the cable is maximum ten feet, which means that you will be closer than 10 feet to the amp. I don't really find it a hassle to get up and change the volume if I need to, but I also don't really change the volume that much. Lastly, it would add considerably to the cost of said amp, which I wouldn't enjoy. Maybe it would be a good thing to offer as an option.

 

[PhaedrusX]

i think CanJam featured three new portable amps that utilized digital attenuators. one was used in a Beta22 as well. i don't know if this signals the beginning of a new direction for amp makers, but if it does, adding remotes would seem like the next logical step.

as mentioned, it might not be a crucial feature for those tethered to their amps, but it would be very useful for those whose amps also serve double-duty as pre-amps.

personally, i like to stay out of the digital realm as much as possible just because it makes it more difficult to trouble-shoot problems, and when something goes wrong it often entails the wholesale replacement of a board or module. also, i just like the tactile feel of toggle switches and analog pots.

 

[CDBacklash]

wouldnt this RFI the whole signal up?

 

[Uncle Erik]

There's a school of audiophilia that looks down upon remote volume controls for having inferior potentiometers. It's generally true - all the nifty stepped attenuators and transformer-based volume controls are not able to be motorized. You usually have to go with a carbon disc potentiometer if you want something motorized.

 

[linuxworks]

digital volume controls (with remote) are a new focus of mine:

all using arduino, any sony IR dvd handheld remote and a burr brown PGA vol control chip.

been alpha testing this setup for several weeks now and its been pretty reliable and fun to use. it has a LOT of software special features that you might not immediately think of, but I found useful once I implemented them

min and max levels, smooth mute via ramp up/down, sticky volume control settings for each of the inputs, wireless x10 power device control (amp on/off stuff) and even color RGB backlight control

there will be a project posted (DIY) once things are finalized and boards are ready for people to test.

 

[auee]

Brilliant, I do not have your skill or knowledge to become a DIYer.

 

[linuxworks]

well, once the design is released out in the wild, I'm sure people will do builds or make kits.

the circuitry and parts are not hard. and my firmware will be easy to modify (if you wish) - which is one of the design goals (to make it user customizable, easily).

right now I only have a PGA style chip but I'm working on a relay stepper that will use the same software, IR remote and lcd style interface.

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBacklash /img/forum/go_quote.gif wouldnt this RFI the whole signal up?

if you mean, will there be digital noise seeping in; the answer in my case seems to be 'no'. an informal rmaa was run on my test setup and the noise floor was very very close to the test gear, itself.

 

[tintin47]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif There's a school of audiophilia that looks down upon remote volume controls for having inferior potentiometers. It's generally true - all the nifty stepped attenuators and transformer-based volume controls are not able to be motorized. You usually have to go with a carbon disc potentiometer if you want something motorized.

You forget about the Melos SHA-gold. They had a photoreactive resistorwhich changed resistance depending on the brightness of a lightbulb which was controlled by the remote. That was an admittedly outlandish (and awesome) solution to the problem, but hey, this is hifi.

 

[XXII]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tintin47 /img/forum/go_quote.gif You forget about the Melos SHA-gold. They had a photoreactive resistorwhich changed resistance depending on the brightness of a lightbulb which was controlled by the remote. That was an admittedly outlandish (and awesome) solution to the problem, but hey, this is hifi.

Wow, that's so over-the-top.

 

[Tridacnid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBacklash /img/forum/go_quote.gif wouldnt this RFI the whole signal up?

Not if it was an infrared remote.

 

[FallenAngel]

LDRs (light dependent resistors) are not really that "new" but it's a nice concept that sounds great and offers ability for great channel-matching.

SKA offers the OptiVol LDR-based volume control for fairly cheap and it's supposed to be quite nice.