Best sounding remote control volume

[Charles Wasserf]

Been looking at the Tentlabs control but at about $350 is more than I am willing to spend. Its tempting though as its claimed better than the DACT. Does anybody have suggestions for something less pricey.

Regards
Charles

[Mooly]

Call me old fashioned but it's hard to beat an ALPS motorised pot if it's used correctly. Depends how DIY you want to get.
You can incorporate it into an "active volume control" using a couple of opamps and that gives really good tracking (channel balance) if you wanted, or just use in place of a conventional pot.
You can buy an off the shelf remote receiver or kit that will "learn" any RC5/Sony type codes or even program your own PIC from the many articles around,

FPRC5RX - DIY learning IR decoder

the project in the above link is first rate... it works... and is by far and away the best DIY implementation I have ever come across for a PIC for controlling a preamp etc. It's cheap enough to buy a usb programmer just for this alone.

[theAnonymous1]

Originally Posted by Mooly

You can buy an off the shelf remote receiver or kit that will "learn" any RC5/Sony type codes or even program your own PIC from the many articles around,

FPRC5RX - DIY learning IR decoder

the project in the above link is first rate... it works... and is by far and away the best DIY implementation I have ever come across for a PIC for controlling a preamp etc. It's cheap enough to buy a usb programmer just for this alone.

If you are like me and have no interest in putting the effort into the learning curve involved with programming; this guys work is an easy way out (reasonably priced as well).....

IRVC2 remote volume control with LCD

I plan on making my own PCB and just use his programmed uC.

[danzup]

Yet another Volume controlers and source selections
I have build all type from ladder , r-2r,shunt , alps motor potentiometer , but best sound are with r-2r resistors and relay !
Also a lot of people from diy audio and another forums build some variant of my projects .

[Mooly]

Originally Posted by theAnonymous1

If you are like me and have no interest in putting the effort into the learning curve involved with programming; this guys work is an easy way out (reasonably priced as well).....

I have tried... honest The subject doesn't "click" with me like electronics does... it's a struggle. That's putting it mildly too.

It takes me a month (and with a lot of reading and reference material) just to light an LED up lol.

Thanks for the link by the way.

[Poindexter]

There are two things here; the volume control, and the remote control. The absolutely best remote I have ever seen or used is the Bent audio one. I can be outside the room and shoot the thing in the door and it works. You would have to talk to John there, but the version of his that I use will fit any discrete attenuator that uses the Elma switch - thus the DACT and Goldpoint, at least. He may have other adaptations as well.

As for the volume control, I use the DACT because I haven't heard any better, and it's compact enough to fit in my little chassis. Disclaimer: I do not hear much difference between any good volume control. I can ju-ust hear a difference between the DACT and an Alps Blue. To me, these are fine detail things, not hyooge make-or-break stuff.

Aloha,

Poinz
AudioTropic

[Poindexter]

Addendum.

Any of the discrete attenuators do have a huge advantage in channel balance at lower volume settings. If you test even a very good boutique potentiometer with a generator and meter, you'll be shocked (shocked, I say) at the imbalance at half or lower volume; 20-40%, typically.

P

[Mooly]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

Addendum.

Any of the discrete attenuators do have a huge advantage in channel balance at lower volume settings. If you test even a very good boutique potentiometer with a generator and meter, you'll be shocked (shocked, I say) at the imbalance at half or lower volume; 20-40%, typically.

P

Good point that problem used to drive me nuts with cheapo pots used conventionally.
This is the reason why the active volume control I mentioned is so good, as channel imbalance due to resistive variations between each track is removed (I should have said you use a linear pot for that and the active arrangement approximates a log law). With a decent ALPS pot (never see any other motorised ones these days) it's pretty near 100% perfect.

[cocolino]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

Addendum.

Any of the discrete attenuators do have a huge advantage in channel balance at lower volume settings. If you test even a very good boutique potentiometer with a generator and meter, you'll be shocked (shocked, I say) at the imbalance at half or lower volume; 20-40%, typically.

P

20-40% imbalance is 2 to 4dB and at half volume (I assume You mean 12°°) this is crap.
Those values IMO only apply to really cheap (crap) pots not a "very good boutique pot".
The "blue" ALPS pot for example (which I wouldn`t even consider "boutique" but good standard quality) and which seems to be sort of a de facto standard in many of the better commercial offerings, doesn`t do this, at least not in the usual usable range.
Although the ALPS datasheet states max. 3dB tracking error (for R=100k and lower R-value pots) between channels, which would be already much, it`s normally far better than this. I`ve used quite a few of those "blue" ALPS and never ran into one that did have more than about 1db error between channels in the 9°° to 15°° clock range (usually it`s around 0,5dB to 0,75dB).

[wfmali]

I use these & like 'em:

TKD (KO-ON) CP-2500

Marcus