Luxman R-115 vs R-117 and R117 recap project.
Sam08861
Super Member
Both settled around 4.94 millivolts after about 2 hours. As is they were initially 6.3 and 6.7 on the left and right. Tempted to replace these pot trimmers with multi-turns, lol.
So finally to the comparisons:
The findings are similar to what I found before the recap, but the 117 edginess on vocals has gone away.
115 still sounds just a bit smoother to my ears. Don't get me wrong, the 117 is very clear and smooth, but there's something just a bit more glassy about the 115s sound, so the sound signature is very slightly different in this regard. Perhaps the 117s caps need more running time to break in or there's a different type on one of the boards. I'll have to open the 115 and see if there a different type on the tone controls, etc.
117 sounds bigger and the bottom end is tighter. The soundstage is also bigger. Mids just a bit more forward and fuller. Highs are about the same on both units.
Both sound amazing, but just slightly different. If I were to score the 117 at 91 out of 100 points, I would score the 115 an 85. It's close, but the 117 is perceptibly bigger and better in a/b comparisons. My Altec Model 14s max out at 70w, so perhaps the differences might not be as great in my setup. I spent $220 for a recapped 115 and $350 for the 117 + ~$120 in caps/relays, etc. (+ a couple of alps buttons I didn't need. I thought the MM/MC button was supposed to lock in and was defective, but turns out this is a momentary switch and the click one is hearing when the unit is on, must be some sort of relay/electronic switch, lol). Overall, I am keeping both but would say with the diminishing returns of audio dollars, it's worth the price difference, even though it's more than twice as much.
Next up is to test the 117s preamp section vs. an external pre-amp. Bought a fully working Technics Su-9070 to try out and hope it's a good match. Unit still has the original caps, but is a one board design, so hopefully an easy job.
Lessons learned in this recap are watch those connection point solder joins on the edges of the board. These are very tiny and the stress of moving the amp boards and power supply boards with those heavy caps/heatsinks can break them loose. The display problem I mentioned earlier, which I thought was the pin grip on the connector turned out to actually be the solder joins just as Porkbuns mentioned. I'll go back and edit if I still can to correct it so as not to mislead someone in the future.
A few other tips.
The wires coming from the volume knob are very delicate where they bend and I'd recommend removing, snipping off 5mm and getting to fresh, unbent wire and resoldering. Mine broke off at the touch as the ends with a bit of solder were very brittle. The remainder of the wire itself seems nice and flexible.
I'd suggest labeling the 2 and 4 pin connectors with the mounting point number. There's only a few of them, but these are the few that might easily be confused. The rest are fairly obvious.
The function control board and CPU board can be separated at the bottom by pressing down on the white bars where the ribbon cables go to the bottom of the cpu board to release the wires. Once that's done (along with removing the other wires), pressing the ears on the white plastic standoffs allows this pair to unfold, making getting to the back of the caps easier for soldering/desoldering.
Group your screws in bunches and note where they go. There's a whole lot of them and many types.
Remove as many of the zip ties carefully before disassembling the boards to get at them. This along with removing the connectors makes moving things around much easier without strain on the wires/connectors.
Watch capacitor physical size on the power supply board and video board. I had to leave the shield between the video board and function control board out since the caps were about 1/4" taller than the ones that were removed. As I will never use this for video, I'll leave the shield out.
Deox the pots, knobs and switches with the face off, access to the little holes is much easier.
So finally to the comparisons:
The findings are similar to what I found before the recap, but the 117 edginess on vocals has gone away.
115 still sounds just a bit smoother to my ears. Don't get me wrong, the 117 is very clear and smooth, but there's something just a bit more glassy about the 115s sound, so the sound signature is very slightly different in this regard. Perhaps the 117s caps need more running time to break in or there's a different type on one of the boards. I'll have to open the 115 and see if there a different type on the tone controls, etc.
117 sounds bigger and the bottom end is tighter. The soundstage is also bigger. Mids just a bit more forward and fuller. Highs are about the same on both units.
Both sound amazing, but just slightly different. If I were to score the 117 at 91 out of 100 points, I would score the 115 an 85. It's close, but the 117 is perceptibly bigger and better in a/b comparisons. My Altec Model 14s max out at 70w, so perhaps the differences might not be as great in my setup. I spent $220 for a recapped 115 and $350 for the 117 + ~$120 in caps/relays, etc. (+ a couple of alps buttons I didn't need. I thought the MM/MC button was supposed to lock in and was defective, but turns out this is a momentary switch and the click one is hearing when the unit is on, must be some sort of relay/electronic switch, lol). Overall, I am keeping both but would say with the diminishing returns of audio dollars, it's worth the price difference, even though it's more than twice as much.
Next up is to test the 117s preamp section vs. an external pre-amp. Bought a fully working Technics Su-9070 to try out and hope it's a good match. Unit still has the original caps, but is a one board design, so hopefully an easy job.
Lessons learned in this recap are watch those connection point solder joins on the edges of the board. These are very tiny and the stress of moving the amp boards and power supply boards with those heavy caps/heatsinks can break them loose. The display problem I mentioned earlier, which I thought was the pin grip on the connector turned out to actually be the solder joins just as Porkbuns mentioned. I'll go back and edit if I still can to correct it so as not to mislead someone in the future.
A few other tips.
The wires coming from the volume knob are very delicate where they bend and I'd recommend removing, snipping off 5mm and getting to fresh, unbent wire and resoldering. Mine broke off at the touch as the ends with a bit of solder were very brittle. The remainder of the wire itself seems nice and flexible.
I'd suggest labeling the 2 and 4 pin connectors with the mounting point number. There's only a few of them, but these are the few that might easily be confused. The rest are fairly obvious.
The function control board and CPU board can be separated at the bottom by pressing down on the white bars where the ribbon cables go to the bottom of the cpu board to release the wires. Once that's done (along with removing the other wires), pressing the ears on the white plastic standoffs allows this pair to unfold, making getting to the back of the caps easier for soldering/desoldering.
Group your screws in bunches and note where they go. There's a whole lot of them and many types.
Remove as many of the zip ties carefully before disassembling the boards to get at them. This along with removing the connectors makes moving things around much easier without strain on the wires/connectors.
Watch capacitor physical size on the power supply board and video board. I had to leave the shield between the video board and function control board out since the caps were about 1/4" taller than the ones that were removed. As I will never use this for video, I'll leave the shield out.
Deox the pots, knobs and switches with the face off, access to the little holes is much easier.
Last edited:
Thanks for the update and comparisons. Looking forward to your thoughts on the preamp. Did you listen to the phono section yet? I think that is the one weak point of this receiver. On the rare occasions that I listen to LP's, I use my external Musical Fidelity phono pre because it sounds much better.
Sam08861
Super Member
I did listen to the phono section briefly just to check it was working but haven’t listened critically yet. Will definitely do that next.
I’ve read the preamp section is decent but does leave a bit to be desired as compared to the amp section, which is really why I bought the preamp to see if/how much better the listening experience might be.
These forums make you spend as much as you save!
I’ve read the preamp section is decent but does leave a bit to be desired as compared to the amp section, which is really why I bought the preamp to see if/how much better the listening experience might be.
These forums make you spend as much as you save!
Sam08861
Super Member
Listening a/b of phono section of 115 vs 117, there is a difference. 117 is again, bigger, fuller and pulls the same disappearing speaker trick as through the cd/cd direct inputs.
Neither sounds as good as cd direct as it seems to give up a bit of detail and maybe dynamics, but the noise floor is pretty silent.
Neither sounds as good as cd direct as it seems to give up a bit of detail and maybe dynamics, but the noise floor is pretty silent.
willy k
Member
I'm new to the forum and very much enjoyed this post. I am looking for a Luxman R-117 to replace my R-361 which has some issues, so this is very informative for me. Seems like the R-361 has no service manual or schematics available for it, I've searched far and wide, very short production run on this unit I think. Thanks for the comparison Sam, keep us informed!
Sam08861
Super Member
Thanks willy k, I try to pay forward all the help I get here by documenting what I do where it might help others.
Listening to the FM section, it seems this pulls in more stations than the 115. I thought my tuner button was broken, but it's picking up a ridiculous amount of stations and very clear, so that it's finding listenable music every .2 or .4 mhz.
Surprising, because the tuner boards look (and I'm pretty sure in-fact, are) identical. I suspect my 115s tuner board may need attention to pull in as many stations, but is working fine, so not going to mess with trying to align it.
Listening to the FM section, it seems this pulls in more stations than the 115. I thought my tuner button was broken, but it's picking up a ridiculous amount of stations and very clear, so that it's finding listenable music every .2 or .4 mhz.
Surprising, because the tuner boards look (and I'm pretty sure in-fact, are) identical. I suspect my 115s tuner board may need attention to pull in as many stations, but is working fine, so not going to mess with trying to align it.
Sam08861
Super Member
Swapped out pre-amp by pulling the loops out of the back and plugging the external pre-amp into the main amp inputs.
Pre-amp is very quiet. Can't even hear it.
Listening to phono, it's a good bit better. Whereas it sounded a bit rolled off, this has a very balanced approach and bass is just a bit tighter & less heavy. The clarity and timbre of the highs is probably the biggest improvement.
Listening to CD via the preamp, gives a similarly flatter and more natural sound and just a hair less clarity noticed only by repeating sections of music, but it's there. More accurate but a tad less punchy. For those who would want to add this back, no tone controls on the pre-amp in this case and using the main in also bypasses all the loudness/tone controls, etc.
I can see why folks would say that the r-117 preamp leaves a bit on the table, but it's subtle but noticeable difference after switching back and forth. The phono section however was a bigger improvement though and I think a worthwhile tradeoff.
The pre-amp still has the original, nearly 40 year old caps, so will retry after a recap/rehab in the next few days.
Pre-amp is very quiet. Can't even hear it.
Listening to phono, it's a good bit better. Whereas it sounded a bit rolled off, this has a very balanced approach and bass is just a bit tighter & less heavy. The clarity and timbre of the highs is probably the biggest improvement.
Listening to CD via the preamp, gives a similarly flatter and more natural sound and just a hair less clarity noticed only by repeating sections of music, but it's there. More accurate but a tad less punchy. For those who would want to add this back, no tone controls on the pre-amp in this case and using the main in also bypasses all the loudness/tone controls, etc.
I can see why folks would say that the r-117 preamp leaves a bit on the table, but it's subtle but noticeable difference after switching back and forth. The phono section however was a bigger improvement though and I think a worthwhile tradeoff.
The pre-amp still has the original, nearly 40 year old caps, so will retry after a recap/rehab in the next few days.
If anything this thread has taught me to maybe check out a R-115 as a value play. I'm a big fan of the R-117, excellent receiver, but kind of doubt the before and after comparisons based on sonic memory, since there is no way to really compare. But if it sounds better to you great, good job on getting it working again. Lux is good stuff.
Sam08861
Super Member
lico, Which comparisons based on sonic memory are you referring to?
In all cases except the initial listening impressions, these were direct a/b comparison of two receivers back to back, switching over multiple times, with the unchanged 115 as a point of reference. All loudness, tone controls, etc settings set to center points or off and same inputs, connections and components used for comparisons (cd, cd direct, phono, fm, speaker a outputs)
Granted, there was a 1/2 a minute or so when changing over the speakers and inputs and waiting for the 7-8 seconds of startup delay.
Last edited:
Before R-117 recap
Comparing the 2, the 117 sounds clearer and more authoritative, while the recapped 115 is smoother, but not as low/mid forward. Also, on vocals the 117 is clearer but I can't tell if it's the increased accuracy or there's a slight distortion. They both sound very, very good with the Luxmand D-100 as a source and into refoamed/recapped Altec Model 14s with the protection circuits bypassed in the crossovers.
I'd give the edge for presence and detail to the 117, but the recapped 115 seems smoother. The 117 seems to have a 'fuzzy edge' to the vocals, but also sounds more powerful and natural, where the 115 is more liquid and smoother. Both very enjoyable to listen to and the 117 seems to have a larger soundstage and has more of the 'live band in the room' sound.
After R-117 recap
115 still sounds just a bit smoother to my ears. Don't get me wrong, the 117 is very clear and smooth, but there's something just a bit more glassy about the 115s sound, so the sound signature is very slightly different in this regard. Perhaps the 117s caps need more running time to break in or there's a different type on one of the boards. I'll have to open the 115 and see if there a different type on the tone controls, etc.
117 sounds bigger and the bottom end is tighter. The soundstage is also bigger. Mids just a bit more forward and fuller. Highs are about the same on both units.
All I am saying is comparing R-117 to itself before and after - was it worth it?
Comparing the 2, the 117 sounds clearer and more authoritative, while the recapped 115 is smoother, but not as low/mid forward. Also, on vocals the 117 is clearer but I can't tell if it's the increased accuracy or there's a slight distortion. They both sound very, very good with the Luxmand D-100 as a source and into refoamed/recapped Altec Model 14s with the protection circuits bypassed in the crossovers.
I'd give the edge for presence and detail to the 117, but the recapped 115 seems smoother. The 117 seems to have a 'fuzzy edge' to the vocals, but also sounds more powerful and natural, where the 115 is more liquid and smoother. Both very enjoyable to listen to and the 117 seems to have a larger soundstage and has more of the 'live band in the room' sound.
After R-117 recap
115 still sounds just a bit smoother to my ears. Don't get me wrong, the 117 is very clear and smooth, but there's something just a bit more glassy about the 115s sound, so the sound signature is very slightly different in this regard. Perhaps the 117s caps need more running time to break in or there's a different type on one of the boards. I'll have to open the 115 and see if there a different type on the tone controls, etc.
117 sounds bigger and the bottom end is tighter. The soundstage is also bigger. Mids just a bit more forward and fuller. Highs are about the same on both units.
All I am saying is comparing R-117 to itself before and after - was it worth it?
Sam08861
Super Member
Ah, I see, it's the recap value you're questioning.
Given that I had a 115 to compare to and listened specifically (and repeatedly!) for the vocal breakup in both instances and did so, I can say that it did, in fact get smoother as the vocal breakup I was specifically listening for disappeared. I would also concede, however, that the bass response and sound stage improvements noted could be wishful thinking. That said, my wife, who has spent nearly as much time listening to it as I have, stated that it seemed 'tighter and smoother' than before. (also from her memory, of course!)
To your other point, The 115 IS a fantastic value play. No question about that and I think somewhat known.
What's more worth it to me for the recap is not having wonder if there's something left on the table component/sound wise or to worry about any signal path caps for another 20+ years.
edit.. I should also say there were 3 leaked capacitors (two on power supply, one on BU power supply board) that I would not have found, were it not for the disassembly and in one case the leak was under the capacitor itself, so removal uncovered the problem.
Given that I had a 115 to compare to and listened specifically (and repeatedly!) for the vocal breakup in both instances and did so, I can say that it did, in fact get smoother as the vocal breakup I was specifically listening for disappeared. I would also concede, however, that the bass response and sound stage improvements noted could be wishful thinking. That said, my wife, who has spent nearly as much time listening to it as I have, stated that it seemed 'tighter and smoother' than before. (also from her memory, of course!)
To your other point, The 115 IS a fantastic value play. No question about that and I think somewhat known.
What's more worth it to me for the recap is not having wonder if there's something left on the table component/sound wise or to worry about any signal path caps for another 20+ years.
edit.. I should also say there were 3 leaked capacitors (two on power supply, one on BU power supply board) that I would not have found, were it not for the disassembly and in one case the leak was under the capacitor itself, so removal uncovered the problem.
Last edited:
Sam08861
Super Member
Ok, finally got the preamp fixed/recapped and hooked up. (Thanks to the amazing folks on this forum)
Will report back shortly on the internal vs. this external preamp sonics.
As noted, no more tone controls using the main amp input, but the volume knob on the preamp is 100x better. I've found that the motor driven knobs have some resistance and would 'rather' be turned by the remote function. The remote function of these receivers, for volume control, is stepped, however, rather than continuous. By hand it's continuous, but the more than average level of pressure to rotate them has always annoyed me.
Will report back shortly on the internal vs. this external preamp sonics.
As noted, no more tone controls using the main amp input, but the volume knob on the preamp is 100x better. I've found that the motor driven knobs have some resistance and would 'rather' be turned by the remote function. The remote function of these receivers, for volume control, is stepped, however, rather than continuous. By hand it's continuous, but the more than average level of pressure to rotate them has always annoyed me.
Sam08861
Super Member
Yep, this particular external preamp is better than the inboard one in my opinion. Clearer and more lifelike. Better than CD straight and the block diagram might explain why. It appears that the main in goes straight to the amp, whereas CD straight goes through the loudness control, volume control and tone control (unless tone defeat is selected) before going to the amp.
You do lose the following however:
Ability to control volume or input via remote control. (In my case as this 70s pre does not have remote capability and appears to be a very no BS minimalist design)
Tone control (A quirk of my particular 'purist' preamp)
Loudness control
In my opinion, worth the trade off, but I do miss the ability to goose the bass just a little or use the loudness 1 setting.
You do lose the following however:
Ability to control volume or input via remote control. (In my case as this 70s pre does not have remote capability and appears to be a very no BS minimalist design)
Tone control (A quirk of my particular 'purist' preamp)
Loudness control
In my opinion, worth the trade off, but I do miss the ability to goose the bass just a little or use the loudness 1 setting.
Luxmaп
New Member
If the break grease gets gummy, the potentiometers needs an "average level of pressure to rotate them". You can use contact cleaner spray to rinse it out (if you use too much spray, it's getting too smooth).
I don't know why Luxman has done it this way...but in my opinion this isn't a real straight-function. The signal has, while CD Straight is activated, to go only through the volume control before going to the power amp.
Thank you so much for this post. I both have the 115 and the 117, I've only hooked up the 117 for 2 weeks. My observation is that on the 117, my volume has to go up to 10 o'clock to reach the 9oclock volume ( loudness) of the 115.
Another issue I find in both of them is when I lightly press the top cover, the sound goes away. It is more problematic on the 115.
I'm not a tech by any means so any tips will be appreciated.
New member, Luxman lover.
Another issue I find in both of them is when I lightly press the top cover, the sound goes away. It is more problematic on the 115.
I'm not a tech by any means so any tips will be appreciated.
New member, Luxman lover.
RemoWilliams
Addicted Member
Running an R 113 at the moment and quite a decent unit, if I could locate a 117 ( mind as well go all the way ) it would be no doubt that much better, but certainly the basic sonic signature is there. Nice thing about the R115 is that prices are generally lower making it more affordable for some of us on a budget.
Both phono sections go through the line-preamps and power amps and thus have the sonic signature of those respective stages. The way to compare them (if it matters) is via Tape Out (Rec) to a different receiver, integrated, or separates.
Congrats on your thorough rebuild of the 117. I have a TOTL Denon receiver I love. Even comparing it to "higher end" separates, both SS and Tube, I love it. No, it's not as good in many areas, but the satisfaction area is fully, well... satisfied.
However, it's now 28 years old. I can't help wondering what new, or even better, internal components might yield. Phono especially, as half my listening is Vinyl. It was made in 1990, when phono was an afterthought. I know from experience that metal film resistors, polystyrene caps, and better 'lyrics can miraculously transform a phono preamp.
But all the boards inside are so densely jam-packed, the prospect of dismantling it scares me. More accurately, dismantling is easy but getting it back together — and working — may be a bridge too far.
