Question about the Sector sets

[Captain Avatar]

My question is this...

 

Are they better than the original cds?

 

I never bought the 97 remasters or any of the gold discs and I was thinking about upgrading my collection with the sector sets.

 

Knowing that they didn't measure up to what you were expecting/hoping them to be, do you still nonetheless consider them to be better than the originals and worth the purchase for someone in my situation?

 

 

 

 

[danielmclark]

A few others will disagree, but yes, I think they're better than the original CDs and the 97 remasters. This seems to be the more or less general consensus around here from those that have heard them, but there are some that disagree. They'll be along shortly

[ak2112]

QUOTE (Captain Avatar @ Dec 26 2011, 09:00 PM)

My question is this... Are they better than the original cds? I never bought the 97 remasters or any of the gold discs and I was thinking about upgrading my collection with the sector sets. Knowing that they didn't measure up to what you were expecting/hoping them to be, do you still nonetheless consider them to be better than the originals and worth the purchase for someone in my situation?

Not even close to as good as the original Atomics or Japanese 1st pressings. They don't have the dynamic range or warmth of the originals. If you like loud, brick walled recordings suitable for iPods and earbuds, the Sector CD's and the 97 remaster are perfect. If you want true audio fidelity, stick with the originals.

[fordgt99]

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Dec 26 2011, 09:35 PM)

A few others will disagree, but yes, I think they're better than the original CDs and the 97 remasters. This seems to be the more or less general consensus around here from those that have heard them, but there are some that disagree. They'll be along shortly

Just about 3 hours later to be exact!

 

Captain Avatar I would recommend waiting until the band announces the procedure for getting the replacement discs for Fly By Night and I think Hold Your Fire. I can't buy them now if I wanted to but IF I could I would wait. Besides, none of my local Best Buy stores have them in stock.

[third hand grace]

I havent noticed too much of a difference, better bass MAYBE, after buying I'd say that except for the 3 dvds (which are reported to be flawed) you really arent getting anything thats gonna blow your mind compared to 97s.

I'm still on my first listen though, putting on PeWright now.

 

The DVDs are impressive to me, but w/out getting anything that special out of the cds, its probably not worth it to the average listener who owns 97s, unless you have the completist disease like me.

 

 

[Captain Avatar]

QUOTE (third hand grace @ Dec 27 2011, 11:33 AM)

I havent noticed too much of a difference, better bass MAYBE, after buying I'd say that except for the 3 dvds (which are reported to be flawed) you really arent getting anything thats gonna blow your mind compared to 97s. I'm still on my first listen though, putting on PeWright now. The DVDs are impressive to me, but w/out getting anything that special out of the cds, its probably not worth it to the average listener who owns 97s, unless you have the completist disease like me.

That's the point...I don't own the 97 remasters, so I'm wondering if the sectors sound better than the original cds.

 

I've heard that the 97 remasters weren't even that good, which is why I didn't buy them.

 

I guess ak2112 is in the minority here?

 

Anyway, thanks for the feedback. Maybe I'll purchase one of them and take it from there.

[WCFIELDS]

QUOTE (Captain Avatar @ Dec 27 2011, 02:55 PM)

QUOTE (third hand grace @ Dec 27 2011, 11:33 AM) I havent noticed too much of a difference, better bass MAYBE, after buying I'd say that except for the 3 dvds (which are reported to be flawed) you really arent getting anything thats gonna blow your mind compared to 97s. I'm still on my first listen though, putting on PeWright now. The DVDs are impressive to me, but w/out getting anything that special out of the cds, its probably not worth it to the average listener who owns 97s, unless you have the completist disease like me. That's the point...I don't own the 97 remasters, so I'm wondering if the sectors sound better than the original cds.   I've heard that the 97 remasters weren't even that good, which is why I didn't buy them.   I guess ak2112 is in the minority here?   Anyway, thanks for the feedback. Maybe I'll purchase one of them and take it from there. Yes, they are better than the originals....a few of them are quite a bit better. Each album is slightly different in how it compares to the original....

[ak2112]

QUOTE (WCFIELDS @ Dec 27 2011, 04:00 PM)

QUOTE (Captain Avatar @ Dec 27 2011, 02:55 PM) QUOTE (third hand grace @ Dec 27 2011, 11:33 AM) I havent noticed too much of a difference, better bass MAYBE, after buying I'd say that except for the 3 dvds (which are reported to be flawed) you really arent getting anything thats gonna blow your mind compared to 97s. I'm still on my first listen though, putting on PeWright now. The DVDs are impressive to me, but w/out getting anything that special out of the cds, its probably not worth it to the average listener who owns 97s, unless you have the completist disease like me. That's the point...I don't own the 97 remasters, so I'm wondering if the sectors sound better than the original cds.   I've heard that the 97 remasters weren't even that good, which is why I didn't buy them.   I guess ak2112 is in the minority here?   Anyway, thanks for the feedback. Maybe I'll purchase one of them and take it from there. Yes, they are better than the originals....a few of them are quite a bit better. Each album is slightly different in how it compares to the original.... The Sectors are nowhere near as good as the originals and the MFSL's. This of course my own opinion, but I doubt I'll be listening to my Sector 1 set again. Actually, I'm probably going to end up selling it. The MFSL of Signals blows anything since out of the water and the Canadian "WANK" CD of Hemispheres is the best the album has ever sounded. I prefer to have my albums with full dynamic range. If I want it loud, I'll turn up the volume!

[Blue2112]

QUOTE (Captain Avatar @ Dec 26 2011, 09:00 PM)

My question is this... Are they better than the original cds? I never bought the 97 remasters or any of the gold discs and I was thinking about upgrading my collection with the sector sets. Knowing that they didn't measure up to what you were expecting/hoping them to be, do you still nonetheless consider them to be better than the originals and worth the purchase for someone in my situation?

Forget about what some of the other posters have said, from a sonic perspective the Sector sets sound light years better than the original CDs issued in the 80s. Yes there are some additional sounds added to HYF (strings in Mission) and there is a short (less than 1 sec) drop out somewhere in Fly By Night. But so what - the discs sound fantastic listened to soft or loud. The better the audio system the bigger the sound differential.

 

Enjoy

[WCFIELDS]

QUOTE (Blue2112 @ Dec 27 2011, 05:44 PM)

QUOTE (Captain Avatar @ Dec 26 2011, 09:00 PM) My question is this... Are they better than the original cds? I never bought the 97 remasters or any of the gold discs and I was thinking about upgrading my collection with the sector sets.  Knowing that they didn't measure up to what you were expecting/hoping them to be, do you still nonetheless consider them to be better than the originals and worth the purchase for someone in my situation? Forget about what some of the other posters have said, from a sonic perspective the Sector sets sound light years better than the original CDs issued in the 80s. Yes there are some additional sounds added to HYF (strings in Mission) and there is a short (less than 1 sec) drop out somewhere in Fly By Night. But so what - the discs sound fantastic listened to soft or loud. The better the audio system the bigger the sound differential.   Enjoy I haven't compared all the Sectors discs one by one to the originals, but I've noticed 3 or 4 for sure that sound better....and are mixed better (ESL, HYF, Power Windows stand out the most)   Explain how and why you think the originals (not the MFSL releases) sound better.

[Blue2112]

[Captain Avatar]

It's quite interesting how divergent the views are on this particular subject!

 

Since the opinions are so varied, I'll try to find a control by which to compare...

 

How do the Sector sets compare with the Beatles remasters? I, for one, LOVED the Beatles remasters, and thought they sounded much better than the original discs.

 

Do those of you who hate the new Sector remasters also hate the Beatles remasters for the same reasons? If so, then I'll know that you and I just have different tastes.

 

Man...I've never seen such a wide range of views on how a cd sounds!

[ak2112]

[Ron2112]

QUOTE (Captain Avatar @ Dec 27 2011, 08:27 PM)

It's quite interesting how divergent the views are on this particular subject! Since the opinions are so varied, I'll try to find a control by which to compare... How do the Sector sets compare with the Beatles remasters? I, for one, LOVED the Beatles remasters, and thought they sounded much better than the original discs. Do those of you who hate the new Sector remasters also hate the Beatles remasters for the same reasons? If so, then I'll know that you and I just have different tastes. Man...I've never seen such a wide range of views on how a cd sounds!

As I have said in other threads, I think the Sector discs are very comparable to the Beatles and recent Pink Floyd remasters, especially in the way the bass end has better depth and resolution. If you liked those, then the Sector sets are a must-have for you.

 

Peace,

Ron

[danielmclark]

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Dec 27 2011, 07:28 PM)

I don't just "say" the Sector CD's are brick walled, it's 100% fact they are. All you have to do is look at a waveform of any given song between them and an original master and see the proof with your own eyes.

Here's The Analog Kid opened up in Adobe Audition. Some of the songs *are* brickwalled, yes. P/G is particularly bad, but that's because it's unchanged from the 97 remaster. Other songs on other albums fare better or worse, but the point is, they tried to make things as loud as they could get away without without creating a wall of green. They largely succeeded, IMO.

 

http://qaqn.com/images/outbound/analog-kid.png

[ak2112]

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Dec 27 2011, 11:19 PM)

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Dec 27 2011, 07:28 PM) I don't just "say" the Sector CD's are brick walled, it's 100% fact they are. All you have to do is look at a waveform of any given song between them and an original master and see the proof with your own eyes. Here's The Analog Kid opened up in Adobe Audition. Some of the songs *are* brickwalled, yes. P/G is particularly bad, but that's because it's unchanged from the 97 remaster. Other songs on other albums fare better or worse, but the point is, they tried to make things as loud as they could get away without without creating a wall of green. They largely succeeded, IMO.   http://qaqn.com/images/outbound/analog-kid.png Thanks for posting the waveform as it's a perfect example of the problem I'm talking about. Looks like there are several places where it is going to clipping. You said it looks like they made it "as loud as they could get away with" and my question to that statement is why?!! What is inherently good about making things louder and losing dynamic range? Can people not be bothered to use the volume knob? I find this maddening and the posted waveform looks terrible to me, yet is all too common in today's masterings. Very sad IMO.

[tas7]

I'm beginning to smell a rat as well. The CD version which I play in my CD player is loud, Geddy's voice almost at clipping level. The guitar has been pushed further right, this gives it more clarity but leaves a hole in the middle,where the drums have been pushed forward. To me it sounds more like a Police album a la Regatta De Blanc.

The DVD version is a mystery to me, there is another stereo version of the CD which when I play in my Blu Ray/DVD player is quieter so has better dynamic range but not so I'm having orgasms about it.

The there is a 5.1 version that if you play through a conventional stereo is weird with different vocal takes, a different version of The Weapon, no echo on the violin in Losing It, and no delay on the narration on Countdown.

All I wanted was a decent version of Signals not three weird versions.

[fordgt99]

QUOTE (Ron2112 @ Dec 27 2011, 11:09 PM)

QUOTE (Captain Avatar @ Dec 27 2011, 08:27 PM) It's quite interesting how divergent the views are on this particular subject!    Since the opinions are so varied, I'll try to find a control by which to compare... How do the Sector sets compare with the Beatles remasters?  I, for one, LOVED the Beatles remasters, and thought they sounded much better than the original discs. Do those of you who hate the new Sector remasters also hate the Beatles remasters for the same reasons?  If so, then I'll know that you and I just have different tastes. Man...I've never seen such a wide range of views on how a cd sounds! As I have said in other threads, I think the Sector discs are very comparable to the Beatles and recent Pink Floyd remasters, especially in the way the bass end has better depth and resolution. If you liked those, then the Sector sets are a must-have for you.   Peace, Ron I never took the time to check but I wonder if there are complaints about the Beatles catalog. Wouldn't be surprised to find out that there are a few. Only complaint I got from a major fan I use to work with was the claim that the mono box set was "limited". If I had $100 to spend I would've ordered one from Barnes & Noble last week.

[tas7]

The Beatles remasters were a huge improvement.

[WCFIELDS]

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Dec 27 2011, 10:19 PM)

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Dec 27 2011, 07:28 PM) I don't just "say" the Sector CD's are brick walled, it's 100% fact they are. All you have to do is look at a waveform of any given song between them and an original master and see the proof with your own eyes. Here's The Analog Kid opened up in Adobe Audition. Some of the songs *are* brickwalled, yes. P/G is particularly bad, but that's because it's unchanged from the 97 remaster. Other songs on other albums fare better or worse, but the point is, they tried to make things as loud as they could get away without without creating a wall of green. They largely succeeded, IMO.   http://qaqn.com/images/outbound/analog-kid.png Are yoy sure P/G is exactly the same as the 97 remaster?....the Sectors discs are all different i thought. It doesn't sound a lot different to me, but i thought ALL of the discs were redone??

[danielmclark]

QUOTE (WCFIELDS @ Dec 28 2011, 12:35 AM)

Are yoy sure P/G is exactly the same as the 97 remaster?....the Sectors discs are all different i thought. It doesn't sound a lot different to me, but i thought ALL of the discs were redone??

Yep. It was mentioned in another thread as a quote from... I forget who now, whatever that dude's name was... Chikli? Hey, it's 1am and I'm two minutes from bed, I'm not looking up the spelling

 

Anyway, he said that the source material from P/G had degraded too far and he had to use the 192kHz transfers that were done for the 97 release. When you're starting from a brickwalled mess, you can't really come back from it.

[malnar]

[danielmclark]

[danielmclark]

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Dec 27 2011, 10:33 PM)

Thanks for posting the waveform as it's a perfect example of the problem I'm talking about. Looks like there are several places where it is going to clipping. You said it looks like they made it "as loud as they could get away with" and my question to that statement is why?!! What is inherently good about making things louder and losing dynamic range? Can people not be bothered to use the volume knob? I find this maddening and the posted waveform looks terrible to me, yet is all too common in today's masterings. Very sad IMO.

See, I don't think that looks that bad at all. There are a few spikes that get right up to the top and probably clip, but you're not going to notice them when you're listening - they're literally a split second.

 

And it's loud, yes... and I know, you'd rather adjust the volume manually, and I agree with that. I'd suggest that the reason they want to get as much volume as they can (without ruining it) is simply because at this point, it's expected - not just of this band or this set, but of all major label rock releases.

 

Slightly off-topic (well, sort of) - do you know of an example that would demonstrate dynamic range in a really dramatic way? Not from Rush, I mean, but has there been a band that put out a remaster that was so dramatically different that even the most doubtful listener would have to go, "yeah, that's totally different, I see what you mean by dynamic range now."

[drbirdsong]

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Dec 28 2011, 10:22 AM)

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Dec 27 2011, 10:33 PM) Thanks for posting the waveform as it's a perfect example of the problem I'm talking about. Looks like there are several places where it is going to clipping. You said it looks like they made it "as loud as they could get away with" and my question to that statement is why?!! What is inherently good about making things louder and losing dynamic range? Can people not be bothered to use the volume knob? I find this maddening and the posted waveform looks terrible to me, yet is all too common in today's masterings. Very sad IMO. See, I don't think that looks that bad at all. There are a few spikes that get right up to the top and probably clip, but you're not going to notice them when you're listening - they're literally a split second.   And it's loud, yes... and I know, you'd rather adjust the volume manually, and I agree with that. I'd suggest that the reason they want to get as much volume as they can (without ruining it) is simply because at this point, it's expected - not just of this band or this set, but of all major label rock releases.   Slightly off-topic (well, sort of) - do you know of an example that would demonstrate dynamic range in a really dramatic way? Not from Rush, I mean, but has there been a band that put out a remaster that was so dramatically different that even the most doubtful listener would have to go, "yeah, that's totally different, I see what you mean by dynamic range now." I can give you a good Rush example. Listen to the original CD issue or even the 97 remaster of Exit... Stage Left or A Show Of Hands and compare them to the Sector versions. There is a very noticeable improvement. But since several people are convinced that the Sectors suck I would say some of the best recent remasters are The Beatles, Pink Floyd and Queen. All three of those catalogs have been remastered very well.