I've had a brief scan of the article and I think there's a bit more to why some artistes didn't gain more universal popularity. In the late 60s/early 70s there were only two ways to access the music – at live gigs or on LPs. And there were only so many gigs you could go to in a week, so it would often boil down to "do I go to Eel Pie Island to see Chicken Shack or to The Oak to see a folk act?" As regards buying records, it was a question of economics. As a 19/20-year old living in London, my reasonably well paid job earned me around £12-15 a week after tax. Out of this I had to pay rent, buy food, clothes, beer (not to mention the odd ounce of dope) – in fact everything. LPs cost around thirty bob (£1.50) so I could only afford one or maybe two a month. Like which gigs we went to, it was a hard choice – especially as the music scene seemed to be bursting with new talent with the advent of 'underground', which combined influences from a hugely eclectic range of musical genres. So, I'm afraid, a lot of great artists had to be virtually ignored in favour of a few favourites.

Sure I remember the likes of Mick Softley, Wizz Jones, Jackson C Frank, Pete Coe, Bob and Carole Pegg (who I really loved) and Robin & Barry Dransfield (who I knew personally from the Yorkshire folk scene)etc. I even have LPs of some of them, but sitting in the Cousins on a Saturday night, it never occurred to us that some of the people we were listening to were actually trying to make a living out of their music. Rather than buy an album we just lent them to each other.

Those who have latterly become folk 'icons' have largely done so because of hype from journalists and writers and probably because their music has a renewed resonance today. I dunno, but I certainly enjoy Nick Drake more now than I did when I was given a free LP of Pink Moon by someone who worked for Island Records (still got it, though).