Did Jimmy Page really play on this and if so, why?? Keith is perfectly capable of playing the opening riff

Jimmy Page plays the solo. The rest is Keith and Ronnie.

Quote
longlongwinter
Did Jimmy Page really play on this and if so, why?? Keith is perfectly capable of playing the opening riff

Jimmy Page played the solo on One Hit (To The Body) because supposedly Ronnie, Jimmy and Keith were hanging out jamming and Page wanted to hear what the Stones were doing so they invited him to do some overdubs. It was done AFTER Live Aid in Manhattan.

Keith does play the opening riff so being "perfectly capable" is moot. Ronnie plays the acoustic intro, Keith the riff.

I have loved this song since I first heard it, hearing it live is on my bucket list!

Theres is a bootleg from Toronto 1989, and the intro riff sounded so weak.........so sad

Quote
KeithNacho
Theres is a bootleg from Toronto 1989, and the intro riff sounded so weak.........so sad

Yeah, a brilliant track which somehow did not work live... Also heard it on some boots, never gave me the shivers like studio version almost always does.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-02 12:38 by tomekdp.

Round the 56:30-mark











Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-02 12:59 by DandelionPowderman.

Horrible live. Incredibly unflowing, especially when it kicks in in the intro.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
longlongwinter
Did Jimmy Page really play on this and if so, why?? Keith is perfectly capable of playing the opening riff

Jimmy Page played the solo on One Hit (To The Body) because supposedly Ronnie, Jimmy and Keith were hanging out jamming and Page wanted to hear what the Stones were doing so they invited him to do some overdubs. It was done AFTER Live Aid in Manhattan.

Keith does play the opening riff so being "perfectly capable" is moot. Ronnie plays the acoustic intro, Keith the riff.

...I always believed Page did the intro!
Him doing a typical 'Keith'-thing, there, fitted the picture perfectly, to my ears.
that solo is sóóó 'Ronnie', imo; with that chaotic, rattling sound, and all these these nervous, feverish, agressive, 'unnecessary' high notes...

So now it turnes out Page did a perfect 'Ronnie'-thing!
Never too old to learn something new...

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
longlongwinter
Did Jimmy Page really play on this and if so, why?? Keith is perfectly capable of playing the opening riff

Jimmy Page played the solo on One Hit (To The Body) because supposedly Ronnie, Jimmy and Keith were hanging out jamming and Page wanted to hear what the Stones were doing so they invited him to do some overdubs. It was done AFTER Live Aid in Manhattan.

Keith does play the opening riff so being "perfectly capable" is moot. Ronnie plays the acoustic intro, Keith the riff.

...I always believed Page did the intro!
Him doing a typical 'Keith'-thing, there, fitted the picture perfectly, to my ears.
that solo is sóóó 'Ronnie', imo; with that chaotic, rattling sound, and all these these nervous, feverish, agressive, 'unnecessary' high notes...

So now it turnes out Page did a perfect 'Ronnie'-thing!
Never too old to learn something new...

The B-bender

Great song! The interaction of the Guitars (weaving?), the acoustic against the electric is perfect

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Round the 56:30-mark

I was at that Concert and the Stones were on fire. I was expecting the same lame performance I saw in 1981 but was really surprised at how well they played. I don't remember them playing One Hit To The Body, but I do remember the Crowd really being into Undercover which I thought was odd.

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
longlongwinter
Did Jimmy Page really play on this and if so, why?? Keith is perfectly capable of playing the opening riff

Jimmy Page played the solo on One Hit (To The Body) because supposedly Ronnie, Jimmy and Keith were hanging out jamming and Page wanted to hear what the Stones were doing so they invited him to do some overdubs. It was done AFTER Live Aid in Manhattan.

Keith does play the opening riff so being "perfectly capable" is moot. Ronnie plays the acoustic intro, Keith the riff.

...I always believed Page did the intro!
Him doing a typical 'Keith'-thing, there, fitted the picture perfectly, to my ears.
that solo is sóóó 'Ronnie', imo; with that chaotic, rattling sound, and all these these nervous, feverish, agressive, 'unnecessary' high notes...

So now it turnes out Page did a perfect 'Ronnie'-thing!
Never too old to learn something new...

Did you know that page plays the intro rhythm chords to I Can't Explain by the Who?

Quote
varilla
Great song! The interaction of the Guitars (weaving?), the acoustic against the electric is perfect

-i love this song.Intro takes me always to Hot Sunny Summer...Dont know which year...but it´s just summer in the eighties.

This is one of the 5 songs to send Mars to tell them "What Does Mean Rolling Stones Song"

Quote
stanlove

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Round the 56:30-mark

I was at that Concert and the Stones were on fire. I was expecting the same lame performance I saw in 1981 but was really surprised at how well they played. I don't remember them playing One Hit To The Body, but I do remember the Crowd really being into Undercover which I thought was odd.

It's amazing how Keith sometimes can not find the timing. Hilarious, really, considering... and on this one he comes in completely wrong and it never does anything. The song takes a bath.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
stanlove

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Round the 56:30-mark

I was at that Concert and the Stones were on fire. I was expecting the same lame performance I saw in 1981 but was really surprised at how well they played. I don't remember them playing One Hit To The Body, but I do remember the Crowd really being into Undercover which I thought was odd.

It's amazing how Keith sometimes can not find the timing. Hilarious, really, considering... and on this one he comes in completely wrong and it never does anything. The song takes a bath.

Didn't Charlie do some weird stuff just when Keith got it together? Seemingly, it sent him right off again

Page's solos were always my least favorite part of the studio version. It just sounds like noise to me. It's sort of a Ronnie solo, but without Ronnie's sensibility and touch. I'll also have to disagree with just about everyone on this thread so far. I think it sounded pretty good live. I actually prefer that live Toronto version to the album version.

Quote
MrBobMartini
Page's solos were always my least favorite part of the studio version. It just sounds like noise to me. It's sort of a Ronnie solo, but without Ronnie's sensibility and touch. I'll also have to disagree with just about everyone on this thread so far. I think it sounded pretty good live. I actually prefer that live Toronto version to the album version.

I think many posters are referring to the problems they had in the beginning of the song, and the fact that this crappy audio has Keith's guitar a bit low in the mix, without any grit.

Apart from that, I agree that it's a good version.

Quote
MrBobMartini
Page's solos were always my least favorite part of the studio version. It just sounds like noise to me. It's sort of a Ronnie solo, but without Ronnie's sensibility and touch. I'll also have to disagree with just about everyone on this thread so far. I think it sounded pretty good live. I actually prefer that live Toronto version to the album version.

I remember enjoying it when it was played at Shea Stadium in '89. The song is one of my latter day faves by the Stones. LOVE the video, too.

Quote
Roscoe

Quote
MrBobMartini
Page's solos were always my least favorite part of the studio version. It just sounds like noise to me. It's sort of a Ronnie solo, but without Ronnie's sensibility and touch. I'll also have to disagree with just about everyone on this thread so far. I think it sounded pretty good live. I actually prefer that live Toronto version to the album version.

I remember enjoying it when it was played at Shea Stadium in '89. The song is one of my latter day faves by the Stones. LOVE the video, too.

while I agree with you I think it's funny we consider a 30 year old song 'latter day stones'.

<<I think it's funny we consider a 30 year old song 'latter day stones'.>>

Not really, when you consider that most of their 400+ songs were released by then. Their output in the last 30 years pales in comparison to their first 20. If they had remained as productive as they were in the eighties, an album every 2 or 3 years through to the present day, then we would look upon One Hit as "mid-period Stones".

The rehearsal clip of One Hit actually doesn't sound too bad. The Toronto version starts off like a trainwreck when Keith pulls the riff completely out of time. I think if they've played it more frequently during the tour, it could have developed into a strong number.

[www.reverbnation.com]

Quote
stonehearted
<<I think it's funny we consider a 30 year old song 'latter day stones'.>>

Not really, when you consider that most of their 400+ songs were released by then. Their output in the last 30 years pales in comparison to their first 20. If they had remained as productive as they were in the eighties, an album every 2 or 3 years through to the present day, then we would look upon One Hit as "mid-period Stones".

Sorry, should have said:

I think it's funny I consider a 30 year old song 'latter day stones'.

Listened to those two versions here - the rehearsal one and Toronto - and I can only come to one conclusion: it is not a bad song at all, but just a wrong band! I had the same feeling also with the original studio version that the guys sound a bit lost and forced there, trying something which doesn't come out naturally, but the live versions make that very clear.

Probably had their played more, it might have worked better, but I am skeptical, and understand them very well for dropping the song.

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa
Listened to those two versions here - the rehearsal one and Toronto - and I can only come to one conclusion: it is not a bad song at all, but just a wrong band! I had the same feeling also with the original studio version that the guys sound a bit lost and forced there, trying something which doesn't come out naturally, but the live versions make that very clear.

Probably had their played more, it might have worked better, but I am skeptical, and understand them very well for dropping the song.

- Doxa

Part of their very short "hard rock"-career. It started with the Too Tough-chorus, and ended with this one.

Both are pretty good songs, but I agree with you. Taylor could perhaps have made something out of them, but they were out of their turf here...

The Toronto '89 intro is shaky, but everything falls into place nicely. Charlie kills on it.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Round the 56:30-mark

I never understand why a singer would sing during rehearsels at this point. Jagger obviously has it down perfectly so there is no reason to put the 2 hours of wear and tear on your vocals for nothing. I would think they would have a back up singer for that..

Quote
stanlove

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Round the 56:30-mark

I never understand why a singer would sing during rehearsels at this point. Jagger obviously has it down perfectly so there is no reason to put the 2 hours of wear and tear on your vocals for nothing. I would think they would have a back up singer for that..

I guess the rather obvious answer is because he enjoys singing.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa
Listened to those two versions here - the rehearsal one and Toronto - and I can only come to one conclusion: it is not a bad song at all, but just a wrong band! I had the same feeling also with the original studio version that the guys sound a bit lost and forced there, trying something which doesn't come out naturally, but the live versions make that very clear.

Probably had their played more, it might have worked better, but I am skeptical, and understand them very well for dropping the song.

- Doxa

Part of their very short "hard rock"-career. It started with the Too Tough-chorus, and ended with this one.

Both are pretty good songs, but I agree with you. Taylor could perhaps have made something out of them, but they were out of their turf here...

I don't know if one Taylor could have taylored it enough to work, since I think the biggest problem lies in the very core of the band (Keith-Charlie-Bill) plus the singer sounds like some karaoke singer having no clue what he is up to... I guess had they given it to some Guns'n'Roses or Bon Jovi to record, we might now have one more 80's rock anthem to get tired of... I mean, with a suitable 'modern' drummer a player like Slash might have easily could have done a better hard-rocked Keith-riff updation in a modern setting (a'la "Black Or White", or what that Jacko's song was called?) than the master himself, and Axl could have cried out loud those lyrics much better home than our Mick.

But kudos for the Stones trying something out of their comfort zone, and trying to update their sound to sound 'current'. It has been long since they tried anything to the effect.

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa
Listened to those two versions here - the rehearsal one and Toronto - and I can only come to one conclusion: it is not a bad song at all, but just a wrong band! I had the same feeling also with the original studio version that the guys sound a bit lost and forced there, trying something which doesn't come out naturally, but the live versions make that very clear.

Probably had their played more, it might have worked better, but I am skeptical, and understand them very well for dropping the song.

- Doxa

Part of their very short "hard rock"-career. It started with the Too Tough-chorus, and ended with this one.

Both are pretty good songs, but I agree with you. Taylor could perhaps have made something out of them, but they were out of their turf here...

I don't know if one Taylor could have taylored it enough to work, since I think the biggest problem lies in the very core of the band (Keith-Charlie-Bill) plus the singer sounds like some karaoke singer having no clue what he is up to... I guess had they given it to some Guns'n'Roses or Bon Jovi to record, we might now have one more 80's rock anthem to get tired of... I mean, with a suitable 'modern' drummer a player like Slash might have easily could have done a better hard-rocked Keith-riff updation in a modern setting (a'la "Black Or White", or what that Jacko's song was called?) than the master himself, and Axl could have cried out loud those lyrics much better home than our Mick.

But kudos for the Stones trying something out of their comfort zone, and trying to update their sound to sound 'current'. It has been long since they tried anything to the effect.

- Doxa

I was just thinking Taylor could have done some Slash-esque licks on them to please the 80s kids. After all, he learned a lot of what he plays off Taylor