Try contacting Sony. They probably have the old documentation to the 400 series consoles?

I do remember that it utilized a microphone transformer which may have been manufactured by Beyer and the preamplifier circuit was pre-signetics 5534, which MCI BTW, disguised and provided their own "proprietary" part number, "2003" comes to mind for that part or, maybe it was 2004? (Not the year, just their part number). I believe I have the schematics to the 600 and 500 series consoles somewhere but not that old one.

You may also want to try dropping a line to Dan Alexander, Eddie Ciletti (through mix magazine) or, John Klett to see who may have a schematic of that old board? I've never really like the sound of MCI boards, especially that one. The Bee Gees liked them. Ughh

Picky
Ms. Remy Ann David

It's amazing how many "old" audio products are lumped to gether as "desireable vintage", isn't it, Remy?
I had a 400 in the early 80s. Bought it used from Phil Driscoll, a born-again Christian, Dove Award-winning trumpeter. I got bit! It was a constant maintenance nightmare ( not the pre's, but everything else),
and we used to laugh at the name MCI :"Mush City Inc " ! I used to visit Jeep at the factory "down the road" from me (6 hour drive!) to get tech training on the damned thing. He and Mack knew that the 400 was not a very good sounding board, and that the 500/600 series were vastly improved. They kept trying to get my partner and me to upgrade it. Certainly not "smooth and creamy"! Stick to APIs our Neves, whatever, but don't get fooled about the 400!

moonbaby wrote: It's amazing how many "old" audio products are lumped to gether as "desireable vintage", isn't it, Remy?
I had a 400 in the early 80s. Bought it used from Phil Driscoll, a born-again Christian, Dove Award-winning trumpeter. I got bit! It was a constant maintenance nightmare ( not the pre's, but everything else),
and we used to laugh at the name MCI :"Mush City Inc " ! I used to visit Jeep at the factory "down the road" from me (6 hour drive!) to get tech training on the damned thing. He and Mack knew that the 400 was not a very good sounding board, and that the 500/600 series were vastly improved. They kept trying to get my partner and me to upgrade it. Certainly not "smooth and creamy"! Stick to APIs our Neves, whatever, but don't get fooled about the 400!

Ok.. see this is not straight and skinny. Why does anyone have to go on a rant to tell me how bad the MCI 400 sounds? I didn't ask if the MCI 416 sounds bad.

Remy, thanks for that advice.

John Hardy has some MCI replacement bits ... not sure if the 400 is amongst them

John makes some good stuff
http://www.johnhardyco.com/

John Hardy has some MCI replacement bits ... not sure if the 400 is amongst them

Nothing for the 400 series. I do have mic preamp cards for the 500C and some of the 500D series consoles, the 600 series and the MXP-3000 MCI/Sony consoles. Thanks.

John Hardy
The John Hardy Co.
http://www.johnhardyco.com

FScott:
Sorry to offend. That was not my intention. I was merely agreeing with Remy that the 400 was not MCI's hallmark audio product. There have been several posts on this site, including ones from Remy, moderators, and myself, who have "been there, done that" with that particular model MCI and having compared it with newer versions and other makes, and learned that it doesn't measure up sonically. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and if you got "punchy and creamy" from a 400 series,good for you. I think that products like API, Mr. Hardy's pre's, and Mr. Neve's Portico series would be a better investment. Peace.

thanks John

8)

OK. Does the Tone Poems series of acoustic recordings, and Tone Poets sound bad? These were done on an MCI JH-416 console.

Pizza Tapes sound bad? Same console.

Now unless someone has some insight into whether Grisman has changed the internals of his 416, I'd venture to guess he is just keeping it in tiptop shape.

fscott55, it's not that people are ragging on the board all that much. It was MCI's first foray into building a console. They used some of the earlier integrated circuit chip Op-Amps, which at the time were not sonically all that good but certainly easier and more economical for mass production. As opposed to the better sounding discrete transistorized units that API and Neve, along with Electrodyne, Sphere, Quad 8 and others were designing without the early technology integrated circuit mushy slow chip sound. That console also had an amusing MID frequency equalizer design that I believe was a rotary control with a boost and cut pushbutton switch, as opposed to the 12 o'clock zero position as in others. If you wanted to cut a mid frequency, you would press the button and then turn the MID equalizer control UP, to cut! LOL Of course that did not go over well with other engineers and as a result the later models had equalizer's as we know them today.

That console can certainly benefit from some newer retrofit chips which I think would vastly improve the microphone preamplifier if so desired? 741s, 748s, 709s just are not good audio chips but were widely used since they were " new technology". But if you could find one of those desks used, I think it would be a good purchase. Probably an excellent bargain?

The recordings that you mention may have been mixed on that board but it's also possible that other microphone preamplifier's may have also been pressed into service for the tracking? I'm sure that board came out better for mixing, avoiding the microphone preamplifier. Of course quality music and musicianship far outweigh any technical deficiencies. I remember the song " Killing me softly", by Roberta Flack. I almost purchased that non-MCI console in the late 1970s from Bell sound studios in New York City. It was an early transistorized console that was custom-built. It was extremely noisy! Just listen to the beginning of that song. It was a great song drenched in HISSSSSS from that console. I didn't purchased it. It was quite ugly too and painted with practically a flesh toned paint! Yeachhh!

John Hardy along with API made some microphone preamplifier replacement modules for the later MCI desks as John indicated. They were more modular so that was more easily accomplished as opposed to the single circuit board topography of the 400 series console channel strips.

That recording that you mentioned that was made on that console may have benefited from the many new and much more fabulous integrated circuit chips now available from numerous manufacturers like, Analog Devices, Burr Brown, Crystal and others that could directly retrofit or retrofit with minimal modifications that would definitely make that board sound like many of the higher $$$ consoles on the market today. Never mind about the microphone transformer. I don't remember whether it was Beyer or whether it was possibly a UTC "ouncer" transformer but if it was the Beyer, even though many people poo poo that transformer, that's the one that most of the fine West German microphones were designed to load into, back in the day. Sure the Dean Jensen Transformers may be better but I still use numerous microphone preamplifier's that have that Beyer transformer in it. I would prefer a preamplifier with that transformer in it as opposed to a cheaper transformer less type.

As far as I can recall, the microphone preamplifier in the 400 series console was a Beyer transformer loaded into a 741 integrated circuit chip operational amplifier (with a bridged resistor capacitor combination for proper secondary loading of the transformer) with a pair of push/pull NPN/PNP relatively generic output " swing" transistors for some additional output headroom, powered from a 15 volt bipolar power supply? A fairly straightforward and simple design that you could easily build up at home on a perf board from Radio Shaft, provided you can locate some of the old Beyer Transformers?

Living in the past
Ms. Remy Ann David

Bear in mind that this is coming from somone with little experience.

I used a JH-600 which had both the standard pres on them as well as the modded ones. It had a very old school sound to it... It was more dynamic sounding than the protools pres, but personally I would opt for something else or outboard preamps.

It certainly was workable, but it kind of had that "live" sound to it.. dark smokey sound. I could see it working well for blues though.

Compared to a Manley Pre or other high enders though.... The bass on it sounded kind of "flubby" (Not clear sounding)

The only part of it that I really loved was the ease of use (compared to a Mackie), and the EQ. The EQ may not have continiously variable pots, but the frequencies selected seemed good, and it struck me as decent sounding. I actually prefered not having continiously variable pots because I found it fast to work with.

I considered a JH, but at this point, I'd opt for something else. And yes, they do seem flakey. Sometimes a channel would be completely out or you'd have to tap/hit it to get it working.

My first experience in the studio was with a MCI 428b in a little studio down the street from Criteria in Miami in 1983. Studio Center East was the name, many many great records and memories, none however about bad sound or down time.
Also metting Gary Vandy and his asst engineer Keith (KC) Cohen back then had a big impact on my future in audio.
I know it has nothing to do with the mic pres, I will say the automation wasnt to my liking. Bouncing automation data back and forth between tracks for each pass wasnt fun but it worked nevertheless.
Back in the mid 80's there werent any outboard mic pres from what I could remember except for JHardy's and his ads in Mix...
Quite Honestly was a great sounding studio, with just the bare essentials
for outboard gear. JH114 I think was the multitrack, I would love to hear
a racked pair of those mic pres now that I think of it.
Curious what you end up finding...

I really dont get the vibe that folks are trying to degrade your quest to find something 'along the lines of'.......I simply think they're trying to say that there might not be aftermarket gear tailored to this particular console and its definate set of sonic wanderings. The point seems to be, because they didnt have a great sonic reputation, that many changes were made in the MCI consoles works and thus the 400 series design was kinda kicked to the curb .....That isnt meant to negate the fact that many superb recordings were made on these machines ....I would tend to look more towards the quality of the engineer acheiving these high quality recordings using this gear rather than the gear itself.

BTW...The John Hardy Company makes very very usefull and sonically pleasant equipment. If you really want a pre that has all the technical aspects of very clean and clear but can be driven to oldskool types of noises, then the Hardy is yer kinda stuff. Theres a LOT of other gear thats quite worthy too, just thought I'd throw in for John since he does drop in from time to time ...

Ive had the pleasure of using some of his gear and its really quite outstanding.

Ok.. see this is not straight and skinny. Why does anyone have to go on a rant to tell me how bad the MCI 400 sounds? I didn't ask if the MCI 416 sounds bad.

Hey, Let's get one thing straight. You posted a question on an open forum that is specific to audio gear and people's opinion on audio gear. You don't get to dictate what kind of response you get or what specific questions you only want answered. You get what anyone wants to reply and comment on. That's they way it works and that's the way it is.

You'd be wise to take any negative comments and weigh them with any other info you can get a hold of. That is the purpose of a pro audio forum such as this.

AudioGaff wrote:

Hey, Let's get one thing straight. You posted a question on an open forum that is specific to audio gear and people's opinion on audio gear. You don't get to dictate what kind of response you get or what specific questions you only want answered. You get what anyone wants to reply and comment on. That's they way it works and that's the way it is.

You'd be wise to take any negative comments and weigh them with any other info you can get a hold of. That is the purpose of a pro audio forum such as this.

Because the fact I am full aware that threads on an audio web forum normally degrade into a debate over what sucks and what doesn't. It makes threads longer and more useless. Obviously there's a *specific* reason why I asked what pre's today can guide more towards that MCI 400 series console sound. I'm fully aware of the changes made in the 500 and 600 series.

Thus, only the straight and skinny is needed.

Well then I think this is your best shot:

As far as I can recall, the microphone preamplifier in the 400 series console was a Beyer transformer loaded into a 741 integrated circuit chip operational amplifier (with a bridged resistor capacitor combination for proper secondary loading of the transformer) with a pair of push/pull NPN/PNP relatively generic output " swing" transistors for some additional output headroom, powered from a 15 volt bipolar power supply? A fairly straightforward and simple design that you could easily build up at home on a perf board from Radio Shaft, provided you can locate some of the old Beyer Transformers? - Remy

I can't imagine anyone modeling and manufacturing outboard pres after these MCI pres. The pre choices you listed are pretty much all going to be undesirably "better" sounding. So bust out the soldering iron and learn to roll your own. But if you are attributing the characteristics of those recordings that you like to just the MCI preamps, then I think you may be barking up the wrong limb of the tree. Again, not what you wanted to hear, but you should know.

But if you are attributing the characteristics of those recordings that you like to just the MCI preamps, then I think you may be barking up the wrong limb of the tree. Again, not what you wanted to hear, but you should know.

Yep, I've been thinking the same thing since I read the first post..

400 series classic cool tone

I must say I love the way a 400 sounds but I never appreciated the mixer that much until digital recording hit the scene. The MCI really took the harsh edge out of the original ADATS.
Just another tool/instrument with it's own paticular use and maybe with modern converters it's not as big of a deal, but for certain material (drums, vocals) I really like what it does.
Yeah
If I ever find a pre that sounds lilke it, I'll probably post the finding here and then go out and buy a few and then retire the old board.

PS

PS Randy Blevins at blevinsaudio.com is the MCI expert. He may even have some 400s in stock

I know this is an old post, but I most likely have a schematic for the 416 mic preamp. It's pretty simple really although there were a few versions.

The earliest 416 was a discrete desk, so I am told, but the three versions I've worked with were based on the Harris 911 opamp (MCI called it a 2001). It ran on +/- 24 volt rails. Back in the day, we replaced this with a 5534, when that opamp also came in the round can package. NOW if you wanted to upgrade the opamp, you'de have to use a wirewrap socket, which works pretty well.

Of the two versions of 416 that I know, one had just a gain control and the other had an input pad. Both consoles used Beyer input transformers (like the UTC ouncers). They weren't great at handling hot signals (hence the need for a pad) but these daze saturation is cool and if you're not going to analog tape, it's the next best thing.

I used the same 416 in three studios - two in Philly - and the damn thing folowed me to NYC, where I got to install the 5534s. I did many recordings on that console and it was quite respectable. After that, I got used to a Tangent desk, which was completely transformerless. I made it work, but when the studio got a Neve 8068, I had to learn all over again because that console was mushy on the bottom (to me, at that time).

Really, it's all about making what you have work.

good luck.

eddie ciletti

Eddie, I hope it wasn't you that put the faders in upside down in that MCI console in that funky studio in Philadelphia??

Does anybody remember that? LOL! Not a bad concept however. That's right! Yup, if you wanted something louder, you would pull the faders down toward you. I want it softer? Push the faders away from you! Now that sounds tangible to me? How about you Eddie?

Intangible idiosyncrasies that intimidate
Ms. Remy Ann David

I believe it was the studio that did all of the recordings for TSOP? You know the famous privately owned studio. Brain cells are not synaptically cohesive right now due to a severe case of sobriety.

Look! A chicken!
Ms. Remy Ann David

I believe atlantic had a console like that - one the Tom Dowd used, I believe.

MCI JH400 mic pre

Forgive this being so late in the day.
The early JH416 had a Beyer Transformer with the MCI 2001 opamp. This is a Harris HA-911. Obsolete.
The JH400A (Yellow/Cream) started with the same thing, but I have heard of later versions being the same as the JH400B (grey) that uses the JE-115K transformer, but I never saw this later version on an A series. I believe that all of these continued to use the 2001 chip.
The main change from the A to B versions was split routing (1-16/9-24), because it was only ever a 16-bus console, and the use of NE5534AH opamps in the bus-summing amps including the mix sum amps. (MCI2003). What I did on a number of these was to modify the mic pre to use Dean Jensen's recommendations for his transformer. I did the same thing to some Harrison 32 series boards that similarly used the Jensen with the HA911 chip.
I would suggest that the MCI 400 circuit is not the best available in its original form. That transformer is not man enough, and it's probably unobtanium.

Porkyc, a little late in the day? It's a year late. But it's never too late.

Yeah, that Harris chip was truly underwhelming sounding. Good riddance. But I thought that as of the tan/beige JH 428, they were using the 5534AN (MCI 2003) throughout? That along with the Dean Jensen JE110ke transformer not the 115. That came out later. By that time, they were all transformer less using those super beta match low noise transistor inputs that fed the 5534. That was way back in 1978. All I have are my manuals to the JH 600 series and JH 500 series consoles, still floating around here. That and the JH 10/110/114 series recorders, etc.. Yeah, more junk on the bookshelves that should be tossed out.

Packrat
Ms. Remy Ann David

i just bought a JH428B from Blevins. It has the jensen's in it. i believe that is specific to the B (grey) boards. it hasn't arrived yet but i'm very excited. the potential to upgrade it was a big factor in my purchase as was the iron on both ends. oh, and having a giant hunk of metal sitting in the control room may have been a factor as well.

Dear All,
Having read the threads now, there's some right snotty comments on this one. A guy asks about a mic pre amp and gets chastised for it!
What might have been suggested was that the sound of a JH400 was not entirely down to just the mic pre. Classic 400A album "Hotel California". The console was not DC to daylight, I can assure you; 100Hz -10Khz more like it! and the 400A had the Beyer transformer with Harris 911 chip. The Beyer transformer might be the same one that was used in the head preamp for the JH110 and JH 100/114, JH16 tape machines, I can't remember

The 400B had the 5534/2003 ONLY in the summing amps. The mic pres started with a Sescom MI-52 transformer as did the 500 and then moved to the JE-115. I never saw any 400/500 with the JE-110 version.

To answer the original question is that the parts used for the original 400/400A mic pre are so unobtainable as to not make the project worthwhile. Although I have actually got some 2001 ICs somewhere.
On another forum somebody wanted to build the JH500 mic pre....Why?
The JH500 mic pre singlehandedly started the ersatz/outboard mic pre amp industry.

http://www.groupdiy.com
and if that doesn't work
http://www.prodigy-pro.com/forum/

people do source these parts
people do like to make these older thingies
and variants there-of

I'm not decrying the choice to build a (not particularly good) mic pre, but that the sound that prompted the original question was not just down to the mic pre, and thus sourcing these obsolete parts might be an exercise in futility, given that you might be disappointed in the result, because of the other factors involved.
The 400 (and the 500) series consoles were all transformer coupled, they used this iffy IC because it was+/-24v capable. As a stock EQ, the 400 wasn't bad, but nothing special.
The point of the JH400 was that it was "Model T" stuff. It brought multitrack recording to the masses. Before MCI, consoles were hand made and expensive. Jeep Harned brought well-built (discuss!!) recording equipment into the average record label's budget. They could now afford to build their own recording studio.

The sound of these records is going to be down to (as well) Urei 1176s, LA2s DBX 160s

My main objection to some of the discussion was that it was personal and not technically objective. Basically one or two replies had suggested that the originator was a complete idiot for even thinking about it. My point is that there is more to this than just one circuit.

Yeah, it's bad sounding stuff all connected together with more bad sounding stuff to equal a real mediocre output. Yeah, just what I want. Not.

No point being made here.

You can't fix stupid
Ms. Remy Ann David