|
How many MCI JH 16 users here?
I'm fixing up my JH16 2 inch 16 track and was curious if anyone here uses one or has used one in the past?
I never used a 2 inch deck so I'm excited to get it running!! |
Been there... that transport isn't graceful by any stretch of the imagination... be careful when setting up your tape path and tensions!!! The electronics are very similar to MM-1200 electronics and sound pretty damn good [MCI actually made "aftermarket" electronics for Ampex machines back in the day]... but the JH-16 transport can be a nightmare.
Best of luck!! Peace. |
Common mods back in the day were replacing the 741 opamp and shorting out the output transformers. That was done a lot in LA back in the 1980's.
Jim Williams Audio Upgrades |
Thanks guys!!
So am I the only one left that might be using one of these old decks? :facepalm: |
what year is it? what transport does it have?
|
The first multitrack I had after our 1" 8-track Ampex 300/AG-440 hybrid was a JH-16.
I got it in 1977 and had it until late 1980. It sure sounded good, but the motherboard had problems that would cause channels to drop out in REPRO and RECORD. I still have a mix of one of my favorite recordings where my GTR solo only appears at the last note. I forgot what I played way back in 1979! My machine came from Shreveport, LA and the last session recorded on it before I got it was David Soul's solo LP! (David Soul was Hutch on TV's Starsky and Hutch.) |
The important thing to understand about MCIs is that brand new they were full of cold solder joints.
Also beware that head alignment is just like wheel alignment and tires on a car. If it has been run even a few hours without proper tape path alignment, the heads could require relapping or even be toast. |
My deck is early 70's with the dreaded jh10 transport.All AC motors! I'm looking to buy a newer jh114 transport if I can find one. Randy Blevins is looking for one for me now but no word yet from him.
I have been reading that the molex pins should have a reflow of solder.I'm game for doing that myself. The only tape decks that I've used in the past were half inch 8 track teac 80-8 and half inch B16 track fostex. I can't wait to hear the real thing when this is all set up.I'll use it more for my own projects then anything.I have an Auditronics console for mixing and track to ADAT HD24xr through Electrodyne and api pres. Anyone with a jh114 transport ? I'm looking!! |
I learned that the hard way that it isn't just the Molex connectors that had cold solder joints.
|
Quote:
once you get the thing pulling tape like it should you'll be in good shape- the decks sound great and needed to be treated like anything that's over 30 years old. bob is also right about head alignments- they are very important not only to increase head life, but have a drastic impact on how the deck will sound. along with randy, steve sadler is a great resource for machines of this era. he has parts for the 100 xport and knows them like the back of his hand. he helped me get one going last month. i do MCI restorations of the later 70s & 80s decks, so if you get in a bind perhaps i can help. good luck, it'll be worth the hard work! chris mara |
So any users now or am I on my own? lol
|
mci jh 16
I had this machine for several years in my studio I loved the sound, but beware, it requires a lot of maintenance. mostly power supply issues. Good luck!! Dave.
|
I have a 1979 MCI JH-16 with a 114 transport w/ alIII and Quior. Just this past weekend I recapped the audio PSU, and dang- what a difference! I also have NOS 16 track heads I bought from John French last summer, so properly set up, it's hard to beat. But maybe I'm biased...haha. Good luck getting your rocking! Feel free to get in touch if you'd like to nerd out on the ownership of 30 year old tape machines...
|
well, i thought i'd swore off tape...but i'll be joining you as an mci jh16 owner on sunday. Did not think i would be going back to tape after this long (12 years) but, i guess addicts eventually relapse or is it relap? :facepalm:
Anyway, took a look around the studio the other day and realized that i have more invested in tape stock than some studios have in mic's. So, with the wife's approval and a bunch of prayers (great god of analog, no transport issues please?...) i am taking the plunge...again. I've just become very frustrated with digital as a multi-track capture medium soundwise. I'll still bounce to pt or at least capture mixes there, that is, until i get an ampex mixdown again. I guess i'm still chasing mirages, but aren't we all. We need more mci stories here people, i know you have some... Nathan. |
cool nathan! are you buying a deck or re-instating one you already own?
i'm a mci user- mainly jh24s and jh110s and an mci console (428) via my retro, all analog studio called "welcome to 1979". i also own a company called "no brainer audio" that restores mci tape machines and am currently restoring a very rare mci jh16 1" 8 track. it has a really cool feature called "flux track" which allows you to individually change the elevated level that you're recording/reproducing simply by moving a 11 stage pot. does anyone have that feature on their jh16? chris mara nashville, tn |
Hey Nathan,
I have a 1977 JH16-16 with a 114 transport and AL-II. Use it all the time and love it. I have had a few minor problems with it, but it pulls tape beautifully and sounds great. Easy enough to work on and there are parts and support out there. Chris at No Brainer Audio knows his stuff and Steve Sadler is great too. In my world, the machine is well worth the effort, not for everyone though! mm |
I had a JH-16 with the JH-10 transport. It was capable of great sound, but was a maintenance nightmare. The transport on that thing was terrifying...it used AC reel motors, and even an AC hysteresis motor for the capstan.
I had it sounding great for a about a year, and then as I got more proficient doing my own maintenance I started tracing down a flutter issue I was observing. Eventually, after re-aligning the capstan and pinch roller, I found out that the machine had been run with poor mechanical head alignment prior to my getting it, and that the heads had a big keystone pattern worn in them and were toast. That was it for the machine for me. I went digital and never looked back. I gave the deck away (including a new 8 track headstack) in 2004. If I had a machine room I'd contemplate getting another JH16...but it'd be one with a decent transport. Maybe someday.... Cheers Kris |
I remember one of the times I was in town visiting, Steve showed me a flux track card for a JH-16. Mine doesn't have it, but I can't say I'd mind if it did...Right now I'm loving the joys of recording at +9 on GP9. I avoided it thusfar because I didn't think my older electronics would provide full erasure. I tried it a few weeks ago, and holy crap. Different machine!
|
I have one sitting next to me right now, dated Nov 82....it's only used for transfer-to-digital work; not calibrated to record at the moment.. pretty happy with it except it seems to be in need of some work lately though- real hefty/lengthy tapes seem to cause some speed consistency issues. Apparently it was the machine used to track some of the Beastie's Ill Communications, but who knows really...
|
^Allow me to correct myself; it's a JH24... got excited when I saw MCI and JH next to each other mezed
|
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
Here's the 3 inch 32 track that almost went into production!
I'm still putting my money together to buy a 114 transport for my jh16 deck. I found a guy that has an entire deck that I might get. |
Quote:
JH 16 / 100 from 73 and JH 24 from 83 ... cadde |
I have a JH-16 24 track from 1979 ultra- rare 2” “Quior” machine, with Autolocator III.
I'm a MCI user from 6 moths ago, and every day I dawn been thankful! |
If the machine doesn't line right up, the problem is cold solder joints and caps. The other problem is that the power supply fan sucks dirt in so you need to clean it out every month or two.
|
MCI 2in 16 Track....
I'll add my name to list....Original 2 inch 16 track JH24 model.
Best, Tim Cochran |
This machine has the nice beefy sounding transformers in the audio electronics
Some people says that it used Jensen Transformers, somebody knows exactly the brand? |
Early JH-24s had no transformers and later ones only had one for sync playback. Jensens are transparent and don't sound beefy at all. JH-24s just had line amps with lots of headroom. Unfortunately most digital gear isn't made that way.
|
We have one from the late 70's with an 'autolocate 2' remote at the studio that literally goes down once a month. The transport is always malfunctioning and cards shit the bed on the regular. I'm always threatening to cover it and just pull "analog tape recording" off the website. But man... when its working, its fantastic. Warm, fat tone for days. I liken it to a really bad relationship with really amazing sex.
|
Sounds like you need the cold solder joints fixed.
|