What can you tell me about First Sound pre-amps?

it's obvious that if you ask people who already use the FS whether it's a big deal or not to lack a remote, or to have separate volume controls, they will say, "no big deal."

I am one of those - BUT, I did not think I was going to be able to deal with it. In other words, when I went looking for "no-holds barred" preamps, I initially ONLY wanted one with a remote, but then I could not help but notice that many of the very best tubed preamps did not have remotes (Lamm L2, First Sound, Aethetix Calisto, VAC, CAT, Audio Note, and so on) - So rather than automatically exclude some of hte very very best in my consideration - I broadened my criteria, deciding I would live with this "inconvenience."

Well, let me tell you, if your someone thinking about a preamp but are wavering because it's got no remote - DONT SWEAT IT. True life might be easier with a remote, true that recordings all vary, and true you'll have to get up off your arse more, but it's managable.....

RWWEAR, unfortunately I do not own a First Sound. . . yet. To be honest with you, I have not decided yet if I will purchase a FS or a Supratek, or perhaps a Harrons.
I am not sure why Emmanuel Go decided to forego a stacked attenuator design. I can think the reason may be to ensure that the two devices achieved optimum electromagnetic isolation.
A stacked design would place the two attenuators in close proximity and he may be concerned that the induced EM fields may influence the other device. In a derived design the two attenuators would be mounted at opposite ends of a non conductive rod running from the front of the unit to the back.
The problem with this option is that either the wireing would be of unequal length, or he would have to use relatively long wires for both, thus violating the principle of minimum signal path, which is his philosophy.
As I mentioned somewhere else some other brands also adopt the twin attenuator design. Namely the Foundation Research V6 linestage owned by a good friend of mine. The difference is that in the FR the volume controls do not move in discrete steps for facilitating even volume settings. But my friend, who like me is completely blind, does not find that to be a hindrance at all.
He also owns thousands of vinyls and CDS -- all carefully labelled in Braille for instant identification -- and adjusts the manual volume with ease whenever needed without apparent difficulty or stress.
I suspect that I would equally be unphased by the quirck of the twin controls. On the other hand, it is perfectly understandable that what may be a minor annoyance for one may become a major issue for another.

I am not sure why Emmanuel Go decided to forego a stacked attenuator design. I can think the reason may be to ensure that the two devices achieved optimum electromagnetic isolation.

This is nuts. Why not call Emmanuel Go and ask him instead of the ceaseless guessing? Tell you what, I'll send him an email with the link and post his reply.

I don't really care why he designed the preamp the way he did and I am not trying to be unconstructive. I am only pointing out what I feel about the design. If you like it, that's fine and I'm sure it is a great preamp. And I would like to point out to Artg that most of the companies he has listed now offer remote capabilties. This is not an obstructionist viewpoint just my feelings on the matter. I lived without remote contol of volume for a long time and still don't have it in my bedroom system but I sure prefer to have it.

Just read Jadem6's extraordinary review of the Aesthetix pre. Have any of you First Sound enthusiasts heard the Aesthetix?