Would you consider Ritchie Blackmore to be an INNOVATIVE rock guitarist?
- Lord THand⚡️Lv 52 months ago
Truth be told I cant stand the bastahd. He takes himself too seriously. "Absolutely No Smiling Or Having Fun In Rock & Roll". F1ck that mentality.
I cant stand people who are wound up tight like that.
As for his playing: Do you remember when I said that "I follow a very specific timeline of music in my quest to find traces of rock n roll influences for my band"?
I meant that. There are certain bands that I dont even acknowledge the existance of, as they serve no purpose to me in the development of effective rock and roll and heavy metal. Glam Rock, Hair Metal, KISS, all Power Metal except Manowar, Fairport Convention, etc.
Well, Deep Purple is on that list. Listening to them is redundant to me. Yes, John Lords keyboards are very entertaining to me. He is quite good. Bit that is all they are, is entertainment.
Why listen to Deep Purple (other than to hear John Lord) when I can listen to Yes, Black Sabbath, or Hawkwind. All of those bands do what Deep Purple does, but they do it better.Source(s): nothing
- AndrewLv 72 months ago
He was hugely influential in terms of his lead playing - his neo-Classical approach to solos was something that a lot of shredders imitated, but in terms of his riffs, he wasn't a particularly innovative songwriter. If anything, it was the neo-Classical elements that he incorporated into his playing that made him stand out. For example, Blackmore often employed a very distinct type of feel to his songs - primarily because he didn't always play with a plectrum as so many rock and metal players tend to do.
To recreate his signature sound, one has to pluck the strings with the fingers, and it's an acquired technique. In later years, Blackmore would continue to incorporate a lot of minstrel-like Baroque, Renaissance type elements into his music and that further distanced him from the rest of the straightforward rock and metal, blues or classically based players. I certainly wouldn't put him in the category of somebody like Tony Iommi in terms of his influence on hard rock and metal composition, but he was definitely one of the early "guitar hero" type players that was actually part of a band and not a solo guitarist like Beck or Clapton.
He was certainly leagues better than players like Jimmy Page and had a more distinct and personalised approach than most other players, but plenty of people came along later that picked up where he left off and went on to become recognised as being premier guitarists at the highest level of neo-Classical shredding. Still, every movement has to start somewhere and his work with Deep Purple and Rainbow certainly launched a thousand careers.
I've always liked him, but I think, like Randy Rhoads who came after him, he was never really meant to be limited to the rock genre. He probably would have been happier if he'd been born 300 years earlier and could have been a wandering minstrel strumming a lyre under a tree somewhere than to have been a progenitor in rock.
- 2 months ago
Yes, he's the inventor of the metal neo classical and was a great influence for all the metal scene
- BinksLv 72 months ago
His sound was recognizable, but not exactly innovative. Never minded listening to him, though. Allan Holdsworth, on the other hand.......
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 2 months ago
Yes, I would. But I wouldn't consider him to be much of a songwriter or all-around musician, though.
- Wire and StringLv 72 months ago
not really. talented? sure. influential? absolutely. innovative? i can't think of any honest innovations he brought to rock guitar.
- Tony BLv 72 months ago
I'd say he certainly was. I don't know that he's doing much innovating now though - could be wrong.
- 2 months ago
I'm just really hurt me when I'll be able to do it