Is the remote controller a boon?

I came across
It made me think differently of pre/int amp that comes with a remote. Have manufactureres spent enough time/money/effort to make theire remote contollers right?
BAT sells remote contols at extra $500, and some would ask why so expensive when there are many recievers at under $200 with remotes?

Would you rather have a remote on your over $1000 pre/int amp at the cost of sonic degradation for conveniebce or not?
Or would you be willing to pay extra $500 for a remote that is made right and has zero interference with the sound?
Or, would you be rather without a remote than paying $500?
I think most of the high end products buy a remote from a common source and do not design their own. I have a Krell remote that will work my older Theta Digital transport and in fact it does a better job than the one that came with the Theta. (Latter on, I learned that my Theta was not shipped with the correct remote and it really should have came with two remotes - a basic remote and a full function remote. It only had the basic remote that could not access all the transport functions. It was not until I got a Krell CD player that I really learned the full benefit of Theta's features. lol
Larryi, many thanks for your indepth post. Now I change my thought on my Rogue Magnum 99 remote -- one big heavy aluminum case with just volume contol. No mute or souce control. Now I think the Rogue remote is pretty cool!
When a small compay like Rogue and BAT spends much effort on their remote, some big shots out source their remotes?
Hi Ihcho,

I find a remote essential. Like Larryi articulated above, it's been my experience that better sound (with my particular room acoustics and equipment) for a particular song can normally be found within a prescribed volume range. For me, that's best accomplished while at the listening area. I have BAT gear.