Remotes: Who needs 'em?


Just bought a nice used pre-amp, make and model unimportant, that is aesthetically and functionally what was needed for one of my systems EXCEPT... Other than a bedridden or legless person, what kind of inadequate, drooling idiot would need a 56-button remote? What happened with our society twenty years ago to convince marketers and manufacturers (no right-thinking person would EVER ask for this crap) that a remote with literally dozens and dozens of little buttons would ever appeal to anyone who is attempting to operate a machine for the purpose of listening to music? The only sane remote I have ever used is that on my 1985-vintage HK CDP (owned for historical reference only!), which has no more buttons than a touch-tone phone of the same era.

It is taking all of the reserve I have to avoid crushing the remote underfoot and pretending that it never existed. I'll get my lazy azz up and handle the limited faceplate controls manually rather than even open the separate manual for the remote, thank you very much! I came very close to purchasing the Vincent SA-31 and taking a hit on frequency extremes precisely because it does NOT have this ludicrous appliance included (and which a recent reviewer bemoaned the lack of...) just to reward them for actually having the chutzpah to offer a reasonably-simple component. Who is reponsible for the idea that every device I own must have a remote? Where can I send the mob of fellow luddites with their pitchforks and torches?

I listen to relax, not to go from my electronically-enhanced workplace to sit and fiddle with some idiotic plastic cell-phone wannabee!
morgenholz
Hmm... so the neurologist was feeding me an urban legend/industry joke rather than an actual (but anonymous) patient account...

Chadnliz, and anybody else who does actually use a remote, my intent was NOT to castigate anybody who uses a remote for any kind of real purpose-- My rant concerns an otherwise very intelligently-designed piece of two-channel audio gear that has a standard remote with 57 buttons, including 14 dual-function ones and four videos. If I can find anybody who has ever taken advantage of even half this number on a given remote, I will be satisfied that there is some niche of the market that actually finds this a real selling point that would tip his purchasing decision toward this device over, say, an identical unit with a rational remote that provided only the basic, useful functions. My invective is driven by my pessimism that NOBODY wants this kind of complexity and overkill in his personal life and it is being forced on us by marketers and designers who subscribe to a phenomenon known as "feature creep." The "drooling idiot" is a character that I am positive does not exist in real life excepting the imaginations of the marketers and designers, a character that they must think characterizes us. The inadequacy I am lampooning is our collective inability to memorize and utilize a 71-function remote on which the only useful buttons are quite small and will be worn out long before the majority are ever touched, except by accident. I do apologize if anybody feels personally attacked. My goal is to encourage anybody who agrees to comment about this insidious trend at point of sale in an effort to influence the marketers and designers-- That would make me happy! The style of my rant reflects the absolute sillyness of the whole subject.
Well,you sure picked a captive audience to incite with your techno-withcraft rant....well done,now back to the news.........."Yesterday over Thailand ,3 Siamese transexuals on a Northwest flight from Burma hijacked the plane and announced they were heading to California for the ........................
It's pervasive no doubt. Look at the auto industry. The other day I listened to a piece on NPR about the high price of gas. They were profiling a family with five children living in Ohio. The father of the children drove a Ford Excursion while his wife drove a Ford Expedition. It was the marketing of the 90s that convinced people those large vehicles were "necessary." I came from a family with seven children, all born within an eleven year span, and we managed fine without these types of vehicles, ah yes, the 1963 Rambler Classic wagon.
The only solution is to not purchase the crap being pushed down our throats. A few years ago we bought a Honda CRV. There were maybe 20 of them on the lot but only two of them were two-wheel drive. We live in Indiana (flat) and don't need four-wheel drive. I bought the two-wheel drive version which gets much better gas mileage.
Unfortunately, U.S, auto makers and their customers are feeling the pain caused by this marketing strategy.
They were profiling a family with five children living in Ohio. The father of the children drove a Ford Excursion while his wife drove a Ford Expedition It was the marketing of the 90s that convinced people those large vehicles were "necessary

It's like a law suit against McDonalds because you got obese from eating their food. It's absolutely irelevant what they show you on TV and what the marketing strategy is. We need to start using our brains.
Precisely Audphile1.My latest fav is the "Are humans to blame for the Midwest floods?".Like the Missisippi always had concrete locks and dams from the Ice Age to control the flow...........I'm sure there are some out there who dont think we had a thing to do with it.........the same ones who vote for a pol because of what he says he'll do for them........right.......my fav was Sen Tower from Texas who once said to a committee"I'm not an alcoholic,I just drink alot"....OK......cheers,Bob