# Popularity By Proxy



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 18, 2022)

*The basic question*:

As I was saying in another thread, it seems to me like it is increasingly the case that music which is not in some massive consumer product — The latest video game, TV show on HBO/Netflix, film, or honestly even internet memes — is pretty much ignored.

Do you also notice this, and what are the artistic, cultural, etc. implications of people primarily discovering music via these other mediums? Obviously, this has always been a thing to an extent, but it seems to me as if a lot more people today don't bother to pay attention to music unless it was in something else they liked first.

I think it's an especially interesting topic since most here seem to be some variant of "media" composer.

*The longpost (optional read):*

My friends and I back in highschool always made a deliberate effort to discover new music. I remember that Wikipedia and Myspace were our friends. We'd literally go to Wikipedia and type in "List of X-Metal bands" and it would give you and alphabetical list, which would get updated of course when some new bands would show up on the scene. We'd then specifically go and try to hunt down their websites, music videos or whatever and then share with each other what we found.

On MySpace, aka "Boomer Facebook", we would spend hours, even on our own time, scouring bands we liked's friends lists to find other bands and samples of their music. 

Most music fans back then seemed to do this to varying degrees, or we'd just go to the record store and talk to employees and other customers about what they were listening to and stuff.

Consider the newfound success of bands Wig Wam and Crazy Lixx. Wig Wam came out with an epic comeback album 2 years ago, but they only recently hit it big because one of their old songs was used for the intro to the TV show "Peacemaker" and Crazy Lixx did a song for the Friday the thirteenth game.

Go to the YouTube videos for these bands, and the comments are flooded with "came here because of Peacemaker/FT13th!" These bands have been around and kicking ass for DECADES, though.

It's great that they're getting more attention and stuff now, but it just feels kinda depressing that it's like no one gives a shit unless you were attached to some other product. Makes me wonder if they only like the music because it reminds them of the game/movie/show.


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 18, 2022)

Ignored by who? The mass audiences? The media?

Because speaking for myself, I have discovered a lot of “unknown” bands, artists and composers on Bandcamp and through this very forum. I also actively use Spotify algos to let it make suggestions, create radiostations etc., follow other users and analyse their playlists and what have you.

So in terms of options for discovery one could easily make the exact opposite of your claim and state that we now have way better tools to discover new music than a couple of decades ago. And for me those work great. So I guess your analysis largely pertains to pop culture then?


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 18, 2022)

And radiostations in GTA have been huge for the discovery of new music to entire generations. My kids (13 and 16) know a lot of 1990s music because of it.


----------



## MartinH. (Apr 18, 2022)

I've been saying the exact same thing for a while now. It seems like "just music" has near zero value for most people. And I can even kind of see why. There is a crazy abundance of music available. Even if you're into fairly niche stuff like black metal, you can consume new albums at a rate of at least one a day if you want (but why would you?). Why go "hunt" for new music when there is more than you could ever listen to anyway and you can easily access it at any time? Scarcity raises perceived value. 

Also I think the occasions where people listen to music changed. I think for most it's not something to focus on while staring at the ceiling, it's to have some background noise while you do mundane crap. And when you pick the soundtrack for washing the dishes or mopping the floor, why _wouldn't_ you pick the soundtrack of a game that you've spent 100+ hours with, made fond memories in and talked to your friends about? I remember those old music hunting days too where you'd talk to your friends about the stuff you found - the whole social aspect that the music-hunting metagame had. That's gone, we all have more music than we need now and the hunter-gatherer talk has moved to other things like games.

(As a side note, there seems to be a worrying trend of people starting to value curators higher than creators, in every sense of the word "value". Especially in games there seem to be increasing anti-creator sentiments among the hardcore fans of the medium. Taking for granted is giving way to feeling entitled to creations.)

20 to 30 years ago the possibility-space of music also wasn't explored as far as it is today. It has gotten waaay harder to find music that steps past the pattern recognition in your brain and makes you think "Wow, I haven't heard anything like this before!". And also you have near infinite other sources of novelty that you can tap into at any time, arguably more addictive ones than music ever could be, so why even try to get your dopamine hit from finding new music?

So the scarcity is gone, the social aspect is gone, the novelty aspect is mostly gone, and the competition against music that has been "emotionally enriched" by products in the widest sense is straight up unfair... great... 


I still go music-hunting once every couple of months, but I'm always looking for something that scratches a hyper-specific itch where I wish there was "more music like x", which I think is one of the last reasons anyone goes actively looking for "just music", and which of course is again inherently anti-creative. This is also where I draw most of what little motivation to make music I have from. Thinking there must be people like me who also want "more of that thing", and who would value it on an emotional level. I haven't finished a single one of those tracks yet though...


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 18, 2022)

doctoremmet said:


> Ignored by who? The mass audiences? The media?


All of the above



doctoremmet said:


> Because speaking for myself, I have discovered a lot of “unknown” bands, artists and composers on Bandcamp and through this very forum. I also actively use Spotify algos to let it make suggestions, create radiostations etc., follow other users and analyse their playlists and what have you.


Well, Spotify and Bandcamp don't count because I'm talking specifically about things like games, films, commercials, etc. Products which feature music, but aren't music-specific.

Spotify and Bandcamp are music-specific distribution platforms.

However, although you and I may have discovered unknown artists via these platforms, most people don't.









Do Music Streaming Services Help or Hinder New Artists?


The likes of Spotify and Tidal are how most of us consume our music. Here's what that means for the musicians.




www.makeuseof.com





Most of the little guys face an uphill battle to get noticed on Spotify to the point it's not even worth it. They have to generate "buzz" elsewhere. So just because there are more music-specific options, doesn't mean most people are using them to find new stuff, even though it technically allows for it.



doctoremmet said:


> And radiostations in GTA have been huge for the discovery of new music to entire generations. My kids (13 and 16) know a lot of 1990s music because of it.


Right, but would they have otherwise taken an interest? That's what I wonder about.

Video games have featured CD-Quality music and licensed songs since the late '80s, films have always had soundtracks since the technology allowed for it, TV has been around for decades, etc — but by my recollection anyway, this never really seemed to be anything resembling a primary way that people found new music to enjoy. 



MartinH. said:


> I've been saying the exact same thing for a while now. It seems like "just music" has near zero value for most people. And I can even kind of see why. There is a crazy abundance of music available. Even if you're into fairly niche stuff like black metal, you can consume new albums at a rate of at least one a day if you want (but why would you?). Why go "hunt" for new music when there is more than you could ever listen to anyway and you can easily access it at any time? Scarcity raises perceived value.
> 
> Also I think the occasions where people listen to music changed. I think for most it's not something to focus on while staring at the ceiling, it's to have some background noise while you do mundane crap. And when you pick the soundtrack for washing the dishes or mopping the floor, why _wouldn't_ you pick the soundtrack of a game that you've spent 100+ hours with, made fond memories in and talked to your friends about? I remember those old music hunting days too where you'd talk to your friends about the stuff you found - the whole social aspect that the music-hunting metagame had. That's gone, we all have more music than we need now and the hunter-gatherer talk has moved to other things like games.
> 
> ...


All good points.


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 18, 2022)

Hehe my points weren’t good points, that much is clear


----------



## doctoremmet (Apr 18, 2022)

Chris Schmidt said:


> Right, but would they have otherwise taken an interest? That's what I wonder about.


Does it matter? My daughter is now huge on UK indierock, and is actively searching for new bands - just like I was back in the day. I had FM radio to ignite the spark, for her it was a game. I am not sure if there used to be more people actively looking for new music some time ago, compared to now. I am not arguing you’re wrong though!

But I disagree with your summary “noone gives a shit unless…” which seems to be a gross generalization. I know a lot of music fans, old and young, who are into bands, neo-classical, and other types of music without there being any tie-ins with movies, Disney, Marvel, comic books, games or whatever. So those people are still around, doing the same thing you and your pal did. Spotify doesn’t count, but Wikipedia does? That’s a bit of a stretch? So why do regular music discovery platforms not count, and back in the day MySpace did? Those are better ways for discovery of new music? If you use Spotify, you’re not meeting the criteria?

Most people don’t use it: true. But back in the 1990s it’s not like there were hordes of people using MySpace for music discovery. Were there?


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 18, 2022)

doctoremmet said:


> Does it matter?


I personally think it does, yes.

Because, at least as far as I can tell, it doesn't seem to be inspiring most people to dig much deeper than the band or composer they heard in a game or movie. I think if it were, we'd see more "unknown" bands riding the other bands' coattails, but it doesn't seem to happen that much.

For example, I don't recall there being even a mini-explosion of popularity in general of "Power Metal" bands despite Dragonforce becoming this huge hit since "Through The Fire & Flames" was known as "that really insane song at the end of Guitar Hero 3". Hell, even Dragonforce themselves totally failed to maintain that burst of popularity after Guitar Heromania died out around 2009. Now, they're back to being a club band and no one who didn't play Guitar Hero back when (kills me that there is now a generation of teens and adults who don't know what that is) has any idea who they are.

What I worry about is that it might create this idea that only the music that makes it into these things, or is composed specifically for them is really worth anyone's attention. And I know that, for myself, it honestly kinda felt like that when I started composing for games. Why, I'm not totally sure, but the feeling of musical "validation" was there and I suspect it affects listeners as well as composers.



doctoremmet said:


> I am not sure if there used to be more people actively looking for new music some time ago, compared to now. I am not arguing you’re wrong though!


I possibly am wrong, but I am only speaking from what I personally see and am aware of stats on


----------



## b_elliott (Apr 18, 2022)

Not much to add, but for fun and insight I listened a couple days back to the interview with Rush by The House of Strombo.

One story Geddy told, for the first 10-15 years they took on every gig the band could land. They once opened for Sha Na Na; half the crowd dressed as the Fonz and "of course" Rush were booed off the stage. 

Doing the play-any-gig-anywhere formula eventually worked for them; but with a financial hit including many grim periods of no $ short of beg and steal.

Zappa mentioned in the 80s he had to stop touring as it had gotten too expensive -- $400,000 in the hole after one tour. His analysis was unless you were corporately sponsored (like Prince was) you could not afford to take your music on the road.

Somewhere between new acts touring, economics and corporate interests lies your answer. That is more Doc's turf.


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 18, 2022)

b_elliott said:


> Zappa mentioned in the 80s he had to stop touring as it had gotten too expensive -- $400,000 in the hole after one tour.


----------



## ed buller (Apr 18, 2022)

Chris Schmidt said:


> *The basic question*:
> 
> As I was saying in another thread, it seems to me like it is increasingly the case that music which is not in some massive consumer product — The latest video game, TV show on HBO/Netflix, film, or honestly even internet memes — is pretty much ignored.
> 
> ...


i'd really go to great lengths to avoid this rabbit hole. Misery is the only thing waiting at the bottom. Van Gogh sold one painting whilst alive...to his brother. 

best

e


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 18, 2022)

doctoremmet said:


> Spotify doesn’t count, but Wikipedia does? That’s a bit of a stretch? So why do regular music discovery platforms not count, and back in the day MySpace did?


Because that was nearly 20 years ago and as I said, this idea of going hunting specifically for new music for its own sake seemed a lot more common then. Also because I started the thread because of people in the current time finding music through non-music media and platforms seems to be dominant. They don't appear to be seeking it out for its own sake anymore.

MySpace, for example, was so popular for bands and music, that the platform was more-or-less rebuilt around this very purpose when I think it was Justin Timberlake bought it. Bet he regrets that now.









16 Bands Who Got Their Start on MySpace


Did you hear these bands on MySpace before they were famous?




loudwire.com













20 era-defining MySpace bands: Where are they now?


A look back at the 20 bands who defined the MySpace era, and what they’re doing in 2019




www.kerrang.com





When I googled the same for spotify, nothing came up for bands or musicians who got their start and amassed a huge following via the platform.

My ponderings would be moot if there was strong evidence that people were using Spotify comparatively to how MySpace was 20 years ago.

But we don't see that. Instead, we see Vide Games saving orchestras and decades-old bands getting very little publicity and promotion through music platforms and communities, and instead only gaining mass popularity because one of their old songs was used in a superhero TV show.









Wig Wam Were Washed Out Until Insane ‘Peacemaker’ Credits Danced Them Back to Life


The Norwegian metal band had broken up and were days from being dropped by their agent when ‘Do Ya Wanna Taste It’ was tapped for the show’s iconic opening.




www.billboard.com










CBS News: How video games are saving symphony orchestras | the Mann.







manncenter.org







ed buller said:


> Misery is the only thing waiting at the bottom.


It's okay, we've met before.


----------



## b_elliott (Apr 18, 2022)

After my posting, I recalled 2 other great acts that had something to say.

Listz (think Beethoven's time) was the equivalent of a guitar shredder but for piano. Back then it was not economically feasible for an orchestra to go out on tour. Listz to the rescue: he reduced entire symphonies to 10 fingers then took those works out on tour to the nooks and crannies of EU. Economic reasons....

Chick Corea: commenting on the 100s of tapes he was regularly receiving from musicians across the planet exhibiting their considerable chops. His explanation for their obscurity (invisibility) was "that's the way our society is structured." His take, "Man, they are out there."
Happy hunting, Bill


----------



## wunderflo (Apr 18, 2022)

I really doubt that it was easier for unknown/unsigned artists to get discovered "back in the days" (pre-streaming). Especially since many of us had to more carefully consider which records (vinyl or CD) we purchased and therefore listened to less (new) artists - simply limited by finances. When I was in my youth 15-20 years ago, I researched which albums to buy next the way I now research which sample library to buy next. And yes, the perceived value of music was higher because of this. Plus, album reviews were more important and allowed me to discover new, less popular music (however, actually very limited by who the publication reviewed, which surely at least required a record deal). Whereas now, when I somewhere hear the name of an artist I don't know yet (on YouTube, TikTok, Netflix etc.), I quickly check out some of his/her songs on Tidal, and decide whether I add them to my playlists to listen to them more regularly. Of course, I might be an exception, because I'm very interested in music. Nowadays, many more people consume music as a by-product of movies, games etc. who are not really interested in it, and hence don't care about finding more songs by the same or similar artists. So I guess more people consume music now, but the absolute number of "true music fans" hasn't changed much (while relatively it appears smaller).

Imo, it only was more transparent back then that there are certain gatekeepers and who they are (record labels, radio stations, magazines, MTV, etc.). Now, there's this (false) narrative that digital transformation would have led to a "democratization" of who can get a slice of the market pie. It's convincing, because it fits into the overall neo-liberal ideology of "everyone has the same chance to achieve success". However, it's only true in one regard - easier access to the production of music. In reality, we now live in the attention economy, and even though they are now rather invisible, there are still gatekeepers who decide (or rather coordinate) who raises above the noise: Algorithms of social media (as often only a big social media following might get you put in playlists or deals with YouTubers, game developers etc.) and streaming platforms being probably the most powerful ones - especially for the big chunk of music consumers who don't care too much about who or what they listen to (and who in former times simply might not have listened to much music at all). And these algorithms are - contrary to common belief - not agnostic to the content published on these platforms. They are not a 1:1 representation of what people like, they also influence what people like. 

So yea, I'd argue not much has changed for unknown artists without massive marketing skills/power or who simply "don't fit in". It only now seems more "unfair" or more confusing and difficult, how to gain attention, because of the contradicting narrative of "everyone can make it, there are no gatekeepers holding you back", which also translates to "if you don't make it, it's your own fault", and in the end helps the platforms, as it makes more people produce content for them and buy their ads.


----------



## flampton (Apr 18, 2022)

This is a perfect, in my bubble I don't see this so it must not be happening.


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 18, 2022)

flampton said:


> This is a perfect, in my bubble I don't see this so it must not be happening.


Who and what are you addressing? Which is happening or not?


----------



## SandChannel (Apr 18, 2022)

Music is my oldest love. I don't know if music is or is not as popular in the mainstream because I don't lift my head up enough to notice. As long as there are musicians, we will never run out of new sounds to explore.


----------



## flampton (Apr 18, 2022)

Chris Schmidt said:


> Who and what are you addressing? Which is happening or not?


Basically in your initial post you invented out of thin air this 'problem' of people not properly searching for music (they're doing it all wrong nowadays) Based on nothing but what you think you're observing in your bubble. (Btw a bubble is not pejorative, it is necessary for all humans to live in bubbles as there are more than 7,000,000,000 of us) Just need to realize that what you think you're seeing is maybe not so much the truth. 

And thus if you want to actually get closer to the truth it is best to listen to other people when they explain that in fact plenty of people in their lives still search for music. And that you'll find the most ardent hunters are younger, and you and your friends (bubble) are now older.


----------



## rgames (Apr 18, 2022)

Music is entertainment. Musical entertainment is an act, which includes music but also includes an experience beyond the music.

Sell the brand, not the music. That has always been true in the music world.

rgames


----------



## RSK (Apr 18, 2022)

Chris Schmidt said:


> Go to the YouTube videos for these bands, and the comments are flooded with "came here because of Peacemaker/FT13th!" These bands have been around and kicking ass for DECADES, though.


You think this is new? Artists have been "paying their dues" since the dawn of time. Anything that looks like an overnight success is usually preceded by years of hard work.


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 18, 2022)

flampton said:


> Basically in your initial post you invented out of thin air this 'problem' of people not properly searching for music


Right yeah, except I am, to date, the only person in the thread who actually supported what he said with examples and stats that exist outside of the bubble — apps and websites specifically designed to facilitate access to music and musicians who use them do not report a noticeable uptick in newer or at least lesser-known artists getting traffic.

Partly that can be blamed on algorithms and sheer quantity, but it's not as if it takes a great deal of effort to go searching through these things. It's also not like Websites like SleazeRoxx and stuff aren't around.

I don't really see how "well yes, but I and my friends still click related artists or check out user playlists or search" in a thread that hasn't even hit two pages is proof of anything counter to my observation that most people aren't being exposed to new (to them) music via actual music platforms instead of other consumer products like games and TV shows. Which seems to be the opposite of how it used to be.

So maybe you'd want to try taking the same approach before you accuse others of "inventing" things?


flampton said:


> And thus if you want to actually get closer to the truth it is best to listen to other people when they explain that in fact plenty of people in their lives still search for music


"My bubble is valid, yours isn't"



RSK said:


> You think this is new? Artists have been "paying their dues" since the dawn of time. Anything that looks like an overnight success is usually preceded by years of hard work.


"Paying dues" used to mean that you busted your ass in the club circuit, traded tapes, passed out fliers, opened for other bands etc. Then after however long, you maybe got a record deal and to shoot a video that aired on MTV, which people watched _specifically_ for the music, just like they would go to clubs for the music or subscribe to music magazines, and to get exposed to new bands similar to what they already enjoyed and what was popular in the day.

It didn't mean "My band busts their ass for 20 years until finally, a Hollywood director puts my song in his Netflix show about Superheroes or video game about killing teenagers or some other unrelated industry or product"

That and how it relates to what the public's experience and perception of what music is and how they judge it, as opposed to thirty years ago when they'd watch MTV or listen to the radio (and the majority of radio stations weren't nonstop retro channels) specifically because they like music and not movies is what I was hoping to have a conversation about.


----------



## wunderflo (Apr 19, 2022)

I guess one could make the argument that there's less incentive/need for the average music consumers to actively/consciously search for new music, as everything (from shopping malls to video games) is so crammed with music, and algorithms start recommending you new songs/artists as soon as you open up streaming services or social media based on what others - who the platforms assume are like you - listen to. However, when we used to ask our local record dealer, watched MTV, or checked out the latest reviews in our favorite magazine, we also only were presented a quite narrow pre-selection of the music catalogue. It might seem as if there used to be a more active effort in assembling one's musical taste, but I'd argue this always has been a rather industry-guided undertaking.

Still, based on what you posted I can't follow your thesis that movie directors and game developers would be the new kingmakers in music. While I also already discovered something new, because it was used for the intro of a Netflix show or a YouTube video, I don't see any representative evidence/stats that this would be the biggest source of new listeners for already popular artists or the most common way for new artists to get discovered? I'd assume that playlists are way more important here. Nevertheless, I'm sure it's a good idea to collaborate with YouTubers, Twitch streamers, indie game developers etc. to promote your music. I also don't see how this would overly devalue music. Music videos on MTV also weren't watched purely for the music. Basically, it's hard to further devalue something that is readily available everywhere and all the time, more or less for free (via streaming).


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 19, 2022)

wunderflo said:


> Basically, it's hard to further devalue something that is readily available everywhere and all the time, more or less for free (via streaming).


Right in the feels


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 19, 2022)

wunderflo said:


> Still, based on what you posted I can't follow your thesis that movie directors and game developers would be the new kingmakers in music. While I also already discovered something new, because it was used for the intro of a Netflix show or a YouTube video, I don't see any representative evidence/stats that this would be the biggest source of new listeners for already popular artists or the most common way for new artists to get discovered?


I can't seem to find any specific stats or surveys, but I can only find examples and compare against music platforms.

However, in my attempt to find them, I did find this. Which is interesting, because it also talks about music increasingly overlapping with games and internet memes.






Soundcharts | Market Intelligence for the Music Industry







soundcharts.com





So I can't tap out of this yet.


----------



## MartinH. (Apr 19, 2022)

We all know that anecdotes aren't data, but we should also know that there is a certain "black hole of data" where metrics are so abstract that they can not be tracked or we lack the tools to collect that data. And we simply can't properly lead this discussion in a constructive way by throwing statistics back and forth. The focus starts to drift towards avenues of discovery and gatekeeping, or being right vs wrong, when that (imho) isn't really the most interesting part. I think the decline in emotional value that music-as-a-pure-product in my opinion has, is what deserves a closer look. And we'll simply not get around anecdotes here. This guy gets to know a lot of these through his job, and he sees a trend too:



The older ones among you that have kids must have lived through a pre-internet time where "mixtapes" or burned CDs were still a thing and there was this almost ritualistic exchange of music that people cared deeply about. Whether that was a "Duuuude, you gotta check out this band called Napalm Death, you never heard anything like it, guarantueed!" or "This Dornenreich song really describes my feelings very well right now.". Ask your kids when the last time was that they either shared or received an emotional music recommendation of something they haven't heard first in a movie, game, show or tiktok. At the very least it would be wholesome to read if this is still a thing. And if they didn't have the pleasure of making that experience, ask them what they think would need to be different for them to love a piece of music that they feel a strong desire to share their discovery with a friend.


----------



## Chris Schmidt (Apr 19, 2022)

MartinH. said:


> We all know that anecdotes aren't data, but we should also know that there is a certain "black hole of data" where metrics are so abstract that they can not be tracked or we lack the tools to collect that data. And we simply can't properly lead this discussion in a constructive way by throwing statistics back and forth


To be honest, I only tried to find it for the sake of moving the discussion forward, because frankly — it's pretty obvious that there is a disconnect going on and things like games and movies _are_ playing Kingmaker way more than they used to, and I don't think it bodes well if every band needs to be like "Survivor" was to "make it".

I'm a little surprised it got so much pushback, people seeming to take it personally, and especially from people who would, in the same post, admit that they or their kids got into some new music or whatever because of some game or Netflix show but insist I must be huffing glue...it's like...bruh...



MartinH. said:


> This guy gets to know a lot of these through his job, and he sees a trend too:


Friggin' love Art of Guitar. Glad you posted him. I didn't know he made this video!

But it's interesting if not-surprising that he also noticed the Guitar Hero phenomena. I just talked about Dragonforce, but it did jog my memory about GH further.

I seem to recall that Foghat as well as Kansas had renewed interest because of it as well.

I had every entry in the series, but I did so because I already loved music and playing guitar. I remember being particularly excited for this spinoff:






Played the SHIT out of this one when I was like 16.

But again, I think I knew every song that was on it beforehand. I was excited about it because it had my favorite 80s songs and I liked the game, but I suspect many were excited simply because "new guitar hero".

Though I didn't think about what Art of Guitar said; a lot of people did have this argument about real guitar vs guitar hero back in the day, but it never occurred to me how many guitar teachers must have had soul-crushing experiences with new students because of it.



MartinH. said:


> The older ones among you that have kids must have lived through a pre-internet time where "mixtapes" or burned CDs were still a thing and there was this almost ritualistic exchange of music that people cared deeply about.


Exactly, and I feel like the MySpace days were the last remnants of that. Talking on the bus about the new bands we found and showing them to each other during computers class was that "ritualistic exchange". But I always found, when I had facebook, that if I shared a YouTube link to some cool new band or composer I found, people would almost never click it. Even supposed "music fans".

People were also still burning CDs back in the MySpace days and so was I. Actually, I think I still have some somewhere where, because they didn't sell them in my country or they were out of print, and I wasn't able to import them at like age 14 — I'd burn an entire album's worth of songs, but the torrent would also include scans of the front, back, and booklet, and so I'd print them out with the best paper my mom had for her office, carefully cut it all out and staple it together and stuff so that I could try to construct the album myself.






It's also very true what AoG says about knowing everything about the band.

Even now, when I find some new band or composer that I like, I usually google the hell out of them and try to find out what's the story. I always find it interesting to hear how musicians, even ones I don't like, got their start.

Going back to Crazy Lixx for a moment, Danny Rexon said he called the band that because when he was a kid, he had a guitar toy named Crazy Licks that helped get him into music at a young age. It later turned out that the guitar toy was actually called "Hot Lixx" and not Crazy Lixx, but it was whatever by that point.

I wonder how many people who found the band because of Friday The Thirteenth would know or even care enough about the band and their music to find that kind of information.


----------

