Why do demos/outtakes often sound better than the final version?

Especially with music from the 1960's. Whenever I listen to outtakes such as those found on The Beatles Anthology, I find that the sound quality is often "3-dimensional" and is as real and clear as if the artists are right there. However, once you get to the final studio versions it's got a more flat, compressed sound to it where the instruments don't sound as distinct and high frequencies suffer. Why is that? Is it the result of too many overdubs on analog tape causing a loss of fidelity? Is it part of the mastering process to create a "wall of sound" (to borrow from one famous producer)? There are some albums like 12x5 by The Rolling Stones that retain that 3-dimensional sound; why does this album have it while others don't?

 

I think I get what you mean - like a lot of the early Rolling Stones outtakes vs their released counterparts or specifically, the released Please Please Me against the version on Anthology 1?

 

Yeah, or another good example is the Anthology of Long Tall Sally.

 

Because they haven't been over thought and analyzed to death...

 

The Axl Rose Syndrome: Overproduction and over arranging.

 

I think you can also make that comparison with superior live versions of the tunes.

 

usually has to do with overdubs--every set of overdubs (back in the 4-track/8-track days) bounced the initial track down a generation. usually why drums (often recorded first) often lose a lot of their thud on old beatle records by the time they get to the master. same with everything on the first round. the tambourines usually sound more 'present' than the snare.

 

Because they are different and fresh to your ears.

If the White Album included the acoustic version of While My Guitar Gently Weeps, everyone would go nuts if 30 years later they heard a rocked out version with Eric Clapton.

 

I've never ever heard a demo or outtake that I thought was as good as tracks that made it on record. Never. Ever. Not once.

 

because it's never perfect so they F' with it...
some of the outakes and sessions I've heard sound so great I cannot believe the final product on some tunes.

 

I'm strictly talking about sound quality, not necessarily the quality of the music.

 

Some live versions have better fidelity, due to no overdubbing on limited multitracks.

 

New mixes. They don't have to deal with baggage of the legacy mixes when preparing outtakes.

 

Interesting! Ihave had a different experience. I'm not a boot addict. But I've heard many cases where an outtake or alternate take was as good or better than some of the material that made it to the record (1. an outtake is a take of a song that was not used 2. an alternate take is an unused take of a song that WAS used, albeit with a different take).
And it shouldn't surprise you that this would be so.
Consider:
Take 5 is unmistakeably the strongest take. But .......... there's an error in it. a fluffed note, an out of sync harmony, some sort of flaw.
In general this is not tolerated in released recordings, though not always. For example there is an alternate take of I Saw Her Standing There that I definitely prefer to the released take. But the alternate in question has a fluff in it, so it was passed over in favor of a
great take, perhaps not quite as strong, but without the flub.
Consider;
You record 55 minutes worth of material. The record company is only up for a single piece of vinyl. So, you make the best thirty-forty minute l.p. you can out of the 55 minutes. The material is all good. So, do you pick the absolutely best material for the l.p.?
Probably not. After all it's all good. You pick the forty minutes that hangs together the best, that make the best program. Listen for example to the outtakes from Let It Bleed. You may or may not like this stuff. But I do like it. In fact I prefer some of it to some of the stuff on Let It Bleed. Yet I would probably have put out the same album the Stones did. The other material, regardless of how good I think it is, just wouldn't fit, it's just a little too different. Let it Bleed as it exists is a pretty coherent program. Put some of those outtakes on there and it becomes just a random collection of tracks and not nearly so satisfying.
These are just two random examples of how this might happen
I'm not refuting your experience. I'm just saying ....................
There are so many reasons for ending up with stuff on the cutting room floor that equals or even surpasses what's on the release, that it would be
surprising if this didn't happen on a semi regular basis. and I suspect it does.
I could give dozens more examples I've heard myself for as many different reasons.
My favorite example personally,
Dylan spent nine months trying to put together an album he was happy with and finally succeeded (Freewheelin)
I suspect when he finally recorded Hard Rain, he knew he could finally be DONE and be happy about it.
Then he put together the album and went off to England.
When he came back he stopped production of the record because he had some new material he was excited about and wanted it on the album.
So he dumped the four oldest songs, the songs he first recorded 12 months earlier, and replaced them with the NEW stuff (hotcha!)
Well I've got both versions of the album and he was just plain wrong (my view of course) I like the earlier version of Freewheelin better.
I like the "old" four tracks BETTER than the four NEW tracks that ended up being released.
just another example of how this can happen, in this case a bias that Dylan has demonstrated throughout his career, a bias against older material in favor
of newer material.
I'm just saying .....................

 

the demo version of "that's entertainment" by the jam is pretty good.. also some "blood on the tracks"-versions are good, maybe not better, but imho equal to the released ones ("idiot wind", etc)

 

Example...

 

there is another thread about this.

i think the demo of ozzy's "mama i'm coming home" is better than the final studio version. there was 1 or 2 cream songs i like the demo better.

 

Demos often have a more relaxed feel. The clock isn't running, no one is worried about cost. There are a few open bottles of wine. The imperfections in the demos are offset by the overall good vibe. I hear it all the time.

 

Certainly the intimate, stripped-down, "just-you-n-Bobby" vibe on Another Self Portrait, is one of the ultimate examples of this phenomenon.

 

Here's one:

 

there are a lot out there

 

Think this more having to do with our ears playing tricks than a factual superority in sound- quality

 

I think the official versions of (especially) The Beatles' output can suffer from overdubs, compression, ADT and all kinds of artistic choices. I found the Anthology- version of Penny Lane a revelation; suddenly there was air and detail in the sound!

 

Not doubting your resolve at all (and I fully respect your opinion).....but have you heard the 'All Right Now' by FREE (Take 2) Outtake that resides on their excellent 'Songs of Yesterday' Box set....that's a really powerful argument for the outtake at least marginally beating the brilliant original...