Some people earn the right to speak their minds — and Ritchie Blackmore definitely did. With decades of musical innovation behind him, his words carried weight. That’s why his criticism of The Rolling Stones still feels bold — even harsh.
From Jam Band to Hard Rock Trailblazer
Long before fame, Blackmore was part of early iterations of Deep Purple. Back then, the band experimented a lot — jamming, playing blues, feeling their way through songs. But Blackmore had different ambitions.
As time went on, his guitar playing — sharp, precise, sometimes fiery — combined with keyboardist Jon Lord’s rich Hammond-organ sound, helped turn Deep Purple into one of rock’s defining hard-rock bands. Their work didn’t just entertain — it pushed boundaries and helped shape the sound of rock and even early metal.
Eventually, Blackmore moved on to another project Rainbow — and later to a folk-rock/renaissance-style project Blackmore’s Night — showing he was never content resting on past success. He was always chasing new sounds, new creative paths.
Why Blackmore Didn’t “Get” The Stones
Meanwhile, The Rolling Stones were experiencing their own 1970s high — albums like Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main St. became iconic, with gritty songs and memorable guitar licks from guitarist Keith Richards.
But despite their fame and influence, Blackmore was blunt. He reportedly said something like: “The Stones? I considered them idiots. It was just a nick from Chuck Berry riffs.” In his view, their music was rooted in blues-influenced swagger — heavy on attitude, maybe, but light on innovation.
He admitted he respected their rhythm and understood why many admired them. Still — “I don’t like them,” he said plainly.
Two Styles, Two Philosophies
It’s tempting to try to compare Blackmore and Richards — both talented guitarists with huge influence. And yes, they shared some traits: both knew the power of rhythm, both could anchor a song with a steady pulse.
But their approaches diverged. Richards often valued spontaneity, groove, and songs built on swagger and simplicity. Blackmore instead chased complexity and evolution — layering exotic scales, mixing classical influences, constantly reinventing his sound.
What It All Means
Blackmore’s critique of The Rolling Stones may sting for some fans. But it reminds us of the different kinds of greatness in music. Some artists like Richards build deep emotional resonance with simple, effective riffs. Others — like Blackmore — push boundaries, blending genres, experimenting, and redefining what the electric guitar can do.
In the end, it comes down to purpose. If you want to move a crowd with raw energy, Stones-style swagger works. But if you dream of reshaping sound, of surprising your audience — Blackmore’s kind of vision wins.
Whether you prefer one over the other probably depends on what you love about rock music: the groove and the feel, or the innovation and the edge. And either way — both paths helped shape the world of rock as we know it.