Recapping receiver will bring back audio details?

Stevescivic

Active Member
So today I had a field trip to an audio boutique and opted to listen to some really bling McIntosh gear (which I have always loved) and noticed the insane amount of detail in the music being played.
I was listening to a McIntosh C2500’s and C47 preamplifier along with a MC152 2x150 watt amplifier. Great combo that I aspire to own one day.

Comparing it to my home system this is what I noticed:
1. SX-1050 all new caps and new transistors as recommended by fellow AKers - nice details and imaging of sound. The best of the bunch as far as my setup is concerned. Not as detailed as the Mac system but my listening space, speaker placement and even the speakers I am using are no match for a $13k pair of Martin Logan’s that was used at the store.

2. SX-3800 recapped with new caps only but all original transistors - great thumpy bass but highs were not as detailed and separation was just ok. Still a good receiver especially for lower volume listening nights.

3. VSX-D1S - all factory original. Honestly this was my first foray into collecting older Pioneer gear and I was grossly disappointed in the lack of details in the highs, the lack of presence and even separation. The sound just wasn’t anywhere close to what I was hoping it could do. It was so bleh that I am considering punting this unit (despite its excellent build quality).

My question is: would a full recap of an A/V receiver be worth the trouble and can I reasonably expect that the sound would change the sound for the better such that it can sound similar to the SX-1050 or better? The D1S was something I really liked from the 1990s era. I have read that it had the spirit of the original SX line as far as quality went but I just feel that it is really in need of a boost but I can’t figure out why it sounds so bland and mashed together. I have no reference as to what the D1S would’ve sounded like new. The receiver is basically 27 years old so I am sure those caps are going south. I know on other vintage Pioneer gear that recapping made a signicant improvement but nobody here has ever done an a/v Pioneer before so I am not sure what to expect.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
So today I had a field trip to an audio boutique and opted to listen to some really bling McIntosh gear (which I have always loved) and noticed the insane amount of detail in the music being played.
I was listening to a McIntosh C2500’s and C47 preamplifier along with a MC152 2x150 watt amplifier. Great combo that I aspire to own one day.

Comparing it to my home system this is what I noticed:
1. SX-150 all new caps and new transistors as recommended by fellow AKers - nice details and imaging of sound. The best of the bunch as far as my setup is concerned. Not as detailed as the Mac system but my listening space, speaker placement and even the speakers I am using are no match for a $13k pair of Martin Logan’s that was used at the store.

2. SX-3800 recapped with new caps only but all original transistors - great thumpy bass but highs were not as detailed and separation was just ok. Still a good receiver especially for lower volume listening nights.

3. VSX-D1S - all factory original. Honestly this was my first foray into collecting older Pioneer gear and I was grossly disappointed in the lack of details in the highs, the lack of presence and even separation. The sound just wasn’t anywhere close to what I was hoping it could do. It was so bleh that I am considering punting this unit (despite its excellent build quality).

My question is: would a full recap of an A/V receiver be worth the trouble and can I reasonably expect that the sound would change the sound for the better such that it can sound similar to the SX-1050 or better? The D1S was something I really liked from the 1990s era. I have read that it had the spirit of the original SX line as far as quality went but I just feel that it is really in need of a boost but I can’t figure out why it sounds so bland and mashed together. I have no reference as to what the D1S would’ve sounded like new. The receiver is basically 27 years old so I am sure those caps are going south. I know on other vintage Pioneer gear that recalling made a signicant improvement but nobody here has ever done a a/v Pioneer before so I am not sure what to expect.

Thanks
One thing I will say with the AV receiver from Pioneer or anybody of which I am Pioneer lover and owner I have the 901 from similar time 1992 or 3 and I have new Elite 501 and another Elite unit and I will tell you must adjust the EQ and the parameters in these new units to get them to sound better and similar to the old vintage 1970s receivers that didn't need hardly any adjustments with tone controls these new receivers do ....& anything from 1990 until today you must adjust the tone controls and use them to get the balance and sound...
Leave all the settings flat and you will not like it whereas the 1970s era receivers even when flat sounded much more warm rich and clear with more clarity but I can say again and attest to the fact that you need to adjust the tone controls and even then you may not be satisfied
 
After 100+ AVRs across the bench for basic testing, I only noticed a few that sounded half way decent. AVRs are great at movie dialog and movie sound effects but just do not please my ears with music.

I even have a $7000 McIntosh AV preamp that sucks at music.

Home theater stuff and audio music stuff just don’t seem to combine well.

The earliest AV stuff where they only added audio channels for VCR and such and did a little Pro Logic to get a center channel and surround can be nice for music. But my 70s vintage stuff always sounds better.

The Capacitor Plague was 1999 to 2007 so gear from then that still works may have issues that can be improved with a recap, but I think it’s like trying to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and irritates the pig.
 
Pick up an SX-535, 636, or 737 and rebuild that. New caps and transistors. That series sounds amazing. Don’t waste your time with the AVR.
 
Hmm interesting thoughts. So even though it is a top of the line D1S that you all agree that it isn’t worth recalling even the prestages? I get if it was a later 1990s receiver or something mid to low end that it is a definite no but the D1s is such a pretty looking receiver that is very well made.

I guess I will just stick with my SX-3800 and Sx-1050 which have been both restored/recapped and call it a day.

Thanks
 
I’ve got a VSX-D1S and it’s a beast to adjust, the preamp has a three way adjustment that looks like a graphic equalizer then the receiver needs some seriously sensitive powerful speakers to truly experience that receiver.

Like Yamaha NS-1000 or Boston Acoustics VR-950
 
I have a Pioneer A/V receiver from the early 2000s (can't remember the model number). Used it for movies as well as music, but was never satisfied with the music sound. Swapped it out for a Sansui QR-4500 to get 4 channel "surround" sound for movies. BOTH movies and music sound MUCH better with the vintage Sansui. Not even really a comparison. In fact, you can't tell much difference between the synthesized quad sound the Sansui can produce from a movie 2 channel source and the actual 5.1 movie track.
 
I picked up a Yamaha RX-900U, for cheap since it had a blown amp channel. One of the easier ones to work on, it sounds just fine driving some old Altec/Lansing model 9's. Amp only rated for 6 ohms, undersized Toshiba 100W o/p devices as usual but newer 200W o/p devices improve the drive capabilities substantially.
I recapped the one amp channel and replaced the blown parts, I can't hear any difference, the wife said I am getting hard on hearing these days :)
Plus points, remote control, favourite stations, the audio switching is done with LC4966 CMOS switches, not as many mechanical contacts in the sig path to oxidize.
 
That is disappointing to hear that recapping likely won't improve the sonic qualities of the receiver. Why is it that others speak so highly of direct two channel mode on the D1S? I mean it's okay but after careful comparisons of the D1S to the really old SX gear that it is extremely apparent how weak the D1S sounds. I sit here listening to my SX-1050 and am constantly amazed at how detailed it sounds. That being said I badly crave the SX-1250 to get a taste of what Pioneer's best sounds like in my home. If what I read is true then the 1250 will be my next goal to acquire and rebuild.
 
Last edited:
The assumption is that the ecaps are out of spec, sometimes they are, sometimes they are not. Know one will argue that newer ecaps are not better than the past but can you actually hear the difference, that is debatable. Know one actually measures performance before and after an ecap change to verify electronically, using instruments, that they made a difference or not.
It really is ones opinion that a 1050 sounds better than a 1250, When we evaluated them back in the 70's we thought that the 950 sounded the better of the lot.
 
Well I had nothing better to do last night but to tear into my brothers D1Sto replace some bad/leaky caps in the power supply and after I finished most of his repair work I decided to fire up mine and listen to it again but this time I adjusted the tone controls. Glad I did because the sound was significantly improved after doing it. I would say the presence is better and the separation improved considerably. Amazing how the old SX receivers sounded good with all tone controls in the center but the D1S need to have the treble, midrange and bass levels jacked up several notches to sound as good as the silver faced gear. I wonder why that it. Was this designed in purpose by Pioneer to account for AVRs that would be mainly used for voice dialog and movie sounds?

I am keeping the D1s and it never occurred to me that I should ever have to mess with the tone controls. Silly me for not trying before.
 
Yep..
Like I said.. adjust the tone controls up...

Even the new 501 , 502, 503... Elites are all adjusted up.. but they have built in multiband EQ's
 
SX-3800 recapped with new caps only but all original transistors - great thumpy bass but highs were not as detailed and separation was just ok. Still a good receiver especially for lower volume listening nights.

I normally like the earlier to mid 70's Pioneer's but l had an SX-3800 a while back and thought it sounded very good indeed, particularly great phono section. Could any of your power supply voltages or the bias or dc offset have drifted?
 
I've yet to hear an AV unit I thought was truly exceptional, but I haven't heard that many. If it isn't great, new caps probably won't help. I don't want to condemn digital as it can be done well, but at least older units that do digital volume control and tone control never sound quite right to me.
 
My expereince with AVR's and pre/pros sound quality wise hasn't been that great. I've had Denon, Pioneer, Yamaha, Fosgate, still have a McIntosh. There's so much video and digital circuitry cranking away in the box that I think it interefers with the basic analog audio performance, even in "Direct" modes. Not to mention the really wimpy power amps in AVR's. They are pretty bad. My restored SX-1250 sounded way better than any of the AVR's I had, but the newer McIntosh sounded way better than the 1250, so I sold it a few years ago.
 
The D1S definitely has a lot of video stuff going on in it but at least it doesn’t support anything digital - it’s that old!

In direct mode it sounds bleh but in stereo mode with the treble cranked up three ticks and mid crank up two ticks makes the world of difference. The D1s was always a favorite of mine because it was a then 12 year old me that wanted my dad to buy the totl receiver but he settled on a 9900s which was the D1s close and very similar sibling.

As for the SX-3800 it sounds very good and in fact at times can sound slightly cleaner than many receivers I have heard BUT where it falls short is when driving speakers extremely hard (which isn’t pleasant to listen to anyways). My all time favorite is the SX-1050 because on default tone positions it sounds the most detailed and accurate. All the other recovers need some tweaking to get the sound to what I like. It is like each generation of Pioneer receivers have been voiced slightly differently but can be adjusted to sound similar to each other (at least in the case of Pioneers high echelon models).

I am dying to own a Mac system. I have been trying to chase that dream for about 10 years now but can’t justify the cost and with a young family that I am not quite there yet for disposable income. The Mac system I listened to was pretty mainstream, C2500’s/C47 pre, MC152 amp and a pair of ML piezo speakers. Total system cost as displayed was over $33k after taxes. Too rich for my blood!

I considered buying a used C2500 tube preamp only to pair with my Emotiva XPA-5 but I am sure I would get bitched at for using a super high end pre with average speakers and a budget power amp.
 
Last edited:
I considered buying a used C2500 tube preamp only to pair with my Emotiva XPA-5 but I am sure I would get bitched at for using a super high end pre with average speakers and a budget power amp.

For what it's worth I still run my Acurus A250 with a litany of pre amps because it's very decent amplifier that isn't worth all that much.

As for AVRs, the problem ultimately is that a lot of them really weren't designed with excellent sounding front ends or amplifier ends. That's not to say there aren't good AVRs, the Yamaha DSP-A1, RX-Z1, and a handful of others actually have very very good sounding amplifiers and pre amps. But they're far and in between. I wager that the removal of focus from stereo really changed how sound was processed. But there are a few out there.

Pioneer however... Eh.
 
I am dying to own a Mac system. I have been trying to chase that dream for about 10 years now but can’t justify the cost and with a young family that I am not quite there yet for disposable income.

I hear you for sure. I started with a single used piece of McIntosh gear and slowly built on that over 25 years. What I've found is that if you buy used and buy smart the stuff actually appreciates over time. I'd definitely stay away from their source gear and pre/pros because they depreciate very rapidly.
Tom
 
Last edited:
As for the SX-380 it sounds very good and in fact at times can sound slightly cleaner than many receivers I have heard BUT where it falls short is when driving speakers extremely hard (which isn’t pleasant to listen to anyways).

Fair enough, yes l didn't drive mine very hard so didn't experience this.

Not to mention the really wimpy power amps in AVR's

Here is a photo of a Yamaha RX-V1, courtesy of canuckaudiog. There are plenty that aren't wimpy.

image
 
Back
Top Bottom