Transcription: Scott Morgan (Loscil)

Released: 11/24/2019

Darwin Grosse: Okay. Today I get an opportunity to talk to somebody who I've been reaching out to and hoping to get into the podcast for awhile. His name is Scott Morgan, but from an artistic standpoint, you will probably know him as Loscil. He works in the ambient genre. But I know that a lot of you who are my listeners know of him because, if nothing else, the artist's name comes up an awful lot in discussions on the lines community and in the Max community. There's a lot of us that are into it. He's done a lot of interviews which help us, understand a little bit more about him, which I think helps us get in tune with them. And so I'm really excited to have him on the podcast. So now I'm going to shut up and talk to Scott. Hey Scott. How's it going?

Scott Morgan: Thanks for having me on your podcast.

Darwin: Yeah, well it's really fantastic to have you on. It's funny because we're talking and they're actually testing the tornado warning signals in the background. So I almost feel like I'm getting a little musical accompaniment to our interview. I'm not sure if people are going to be able to hear that, but it's a little bit distracting for me, just because normally that's kinda bad, right? It's like the first Wednesday of every month and I really want to get out there and record it because it's a mechanical monstrosity. It's this huge horn on a rotating motor. It's nutty.

For people who might not be familiar with your work, I would love for you to explain a little bit about your Loscil project as well as any other projects that you have going. But you know, quite frankly, I (and I mentioned it in the introduction) see your name come up an awful lot in terms of what people are listening to or what they're into. So, I th I think a lot of people will be aware, but I'd still like to have you frame what your work is.

Scott: Sure. Loscil as a project was started about 20 years ago, so I don't know if we want to get into the history too deeply right now, but it was basically, you know... I'm based in Vancouver and, I studied music here at Simon Fraser University and coming out of the university in the mid to late nineties. I was heavily involved in the indie music scene here, in rock bands and things like that. And I was looking for a musical space that kind of was somewhere between academia and what I had just finished studying. And then also the rock world, which I was kinda growing out of. So I was really interested in excited about a lot of music I was hearing coming from Europe, you know? A lot of kinda what you would loosely call ambient music.

And back in those days, you know, it was popular to call it glitch or there were artists like Marcus Popp's project as Oval, and Gas and Pole and there was all this music that was very exotic to me that I - especially here in Vancouver - there was just nothing like that going on. And I was really drawn into this kind of space that incorporated a lot of the electronic and electroacoustic and computer music ideas that I had been exposed to but also was maybe, for lack of a better word, more accessible than a lot of the really academic music which can get pretty far out there. So anyway, long story short, I started this project with a bunch of friends where we were doing audio visual performances at a local experimental theater called The Blinding Light.

We were doing these regular nights and I sort of tongue-in-cheek called this project Loscil because I liked the looping oscillator idea out of the loscil function from Csound and started experimenting with audio and visual stuff. And it was, even in its origins, fairly ambient-ish. I was definitely an Eno fan and really into a lot of the Aphex Twin ambient stuff. That was the birth of it, probably around '98 or so. And then, I sent a demo to a bunch of record labels including Kranky and they were interested in releasing my first full length, which came out in 2001, [called] Triple Point. And that's the origin story of Loscil as a project. And I honestly would not have anticipated it lasting this long. Kind of felt like I maybe would have moved on to other things, but at this point it's kinda lived its own life, and I enjoy kinda treating it like a sort of ongoing project and throwing things at it and taking things away from it and just seeing where it goes. It continues to sort of entertain me so I keep doing it.

Darwin: Sure, absolutely. First of all, I feel lucky - because in a way we have almost 20 years worth of releases of years to be able to check out. People can go to and see the body of work there; it's enjoyable to be able to go back and watch your development over that period of time. You talk about being influenced by sort of that Oval/Pole kind of aesthetic. And I would say certainly some of those early albums really owe a lot to that: the glitch-driven kind of pulse, the rhythm thing in combination with very prominent bassline, right? You took that concept, but at the same time making it your own, and what's interesting is as I've listened to... as I think the opportunity to listen to the whole body of work, it's cool to see that now 20 years later you're doing work that's clearly a growth and extension of stuff that you did, but that there's this voice. I don't know if it comes from the peculiar way that you do sound design or some of the chord chord structures and chord changes that you use, that really make things sound peculiarly yours.

I mean, is there something that you personally identify as the thing that makes your music you?

Scott: Um, yes. I think it is partly about process and it is partly about my approach, a lot of which was informed by my time in university where, you know, I studied with Barry Truax, who was a very well known computer musician who was very instrumental in sort of real time early experiments of real time granular synthesis. And I sort of straddled the Communications Department and was interested in carrying on the work of our Pierre Schaefer on sort of acoustic ecology and you know, listening to the environment and using sounds from the environment. And it's, it's not an uncommon practice obviously these days to do field recordings and to manipulate field recordings. But I think this idea of lifting sounds from the world and transforming them and using that kind of approach to sound design and some of those techniques including granular synthesis and convolution and various forms of spectral processing. I think through those techniques kind of developed a palette that I was really attracted to and I've never really abandoned that fundamental process. And that kind of love of manipulating sounds and turning them into sort of deep massive textures. I mean, I'm just really attracted to that.

Darwin: Yeah, that's interesting. I guess for me, if I were to put a stamp on something that would sound yours, it would be based on that: the large, sort of like... I dunno, I tend to think of your stuff as sounding foggy a lot of times - which is like such a weird adjective to use for music, except that it's just like what comes to mind, right? It just happens to be a thing.

Scott: I think from a very early stage, I was influenced by composers like Legeti, who are exploring things... like Barry Truax - his work is like this too, but it's exploring density and exploring texture rather than melody and harmony and rhythm first. And it's a timbral way of thinking about sound. And I think it in some sort of very natural way takes us into this kind of, for lack of a better description, womb-like kind of state where you're just surrounded by sound and immersed in sound and it really pulls you in and pulls you under in a kind of way. So I do love that. And that's the core of what the Loscil sound is.

Darwin: Sure. That's cool. I want to come back to some of these ideas because there's a lot to explore there, but before we do that, one of the things I like doing in my podcast is talking to people a little bit about their beginning story or their travels, and becoming the artists that they are now. And I'm curious what is your background? Where did you come from? Out of the band kid thing or the rock band thing or just... how did you get into the point? You know, cause there's something, not everybody like comes out of middle school and high school and says "I'm going to go to Simon Frasier and study with Barry Truax", right? There's gotta be some connecting threads there. And I'm curious what those might be.

Scott: Yeah, yeah. I grew up in a small town in BC, here in Canada, on Vancouver Island. And I was bored to tears, to be honest, in a small town. My uncle gave me a guitar at around age 12 and around the same time I was studying tenor and baritone saxophone in high school. I credit my Grade Seven band teacher for allowing anyone who was interested to come into the band room during lunch or after school and just play around with instruments. We formed a rock band and I started playing drums cause I... I've played drums for many years, as well as guitar - I'd self taught myself guitar, but learned saxophone. And so I had this weird initial mixed bag of exposure to instruments and musical ideas that was completely based on play and fun and was completely my own thing.

And because of being bored in a small town, I think I just was really drawn into it. But on top of that as I was getting close to the end of high school, I knew that I wasn't going to be a Rock Star, but wanted to maintain a connection to music and the music industry somehow. So I had this dream of becoming like a producer or a record recording engineer. And I remember talking to my dad about this and he's like "well look, there's this program at SFU..." and he was an alumnus of SFU. It's like a communications program that has this thread, acoustic and electric. We study communication, they talk about computer music. And it sounded interesting enough that I thought, "OK", so he convinced me, rather than going to like a tech school or something, to move to the city and try out University.

Scott: And, just to be honest, I ended up doing a double major in communications and music, mostly because of Barry. He was a joint professor and it just opened so many doors for me, not only the technical sort of working with computers, which in the early nineties - computers doing audio was a new thing. So there was a lot of interesting and exciting and rapidly changing stuff happening at that time. It was an exciting time and my mind was exploding with ideas, and at the same time I was still playing in rock bands as a drummer and a guitar player and it was working on 4-track tape recorders and manipulating sound in the most basic ways. But I was really just drawn into this idea of recording sound, messing with it and seeing what comes out the other side.

And it became an official practice in school where I also volunteered to do a lot of sound work for film, both scoring and sound design. And that led, after school, to working in new media and then 10 years working as a sound director and sound designer - and video games. So I was immersed in production, and also immersed in this idea of interactivity, which is still something that I'm very interested in and connects a lot to other sort of musical ideas. So that's the rather random meandering origin story.

Darwin: Sure. Well, I mean, Barry Truax is sort of... I would say he's like a hero of the realm in the computer music world. It must've been... it sounds like you didn't necessarily know that much about him when you got into the school. What is it about him and the things he was showing, what was it that caught your attention?

I mean, I say this because certainly the stuff he was doing in computer music was about as far from playing guitar in a rock band as you can imagine. So I'm just curious, how did that capture your attention?

Scott: I think initially... Barry is, of course, known for his working in computer music, but he's also an incredible teacher in terms of the basics of sound and how sound works and listening and what listening is and what I was really drawn to. Yeah, I didn't know anything about him. You know, my first, second year course in acoustic communications, I didn't know - he was just another teacher. I didn't really know much about him at first. But what he exposed me to is this idea of two things. One is this the classic kind of idea of the studio as an instrument and using the tools of a music studio - or in the communication sense, just a generic sort of recording studio and using those tools to manipulate sound, just to sort of pitch things up, pitch things down to edit.

Like, we did a lot of tape editing, cause this was a transition time in the early nineties when, I think, universities almost functioned a little bit like working museums, and you had old technology interfacing with new technology. It was great to be able to learn how to cut tape with a razor blade because that gives you the paradigm for how Pro Tools works and things like this. So anyway, Barry was very good at laying the groundwork and exposing me to the fundamental ideas of listening, recording sound and using the studio as an instrument to make music with.

Darwin: That sounds like an amazing opportunity to have him be available for those kinds of introductions because if nothing else, there's a a quality of like, "Oh, you're getting that here, let me show you the next thing."" And he's going to be almost an endless pool of what the next thing could be.

Scott: Totally. I have just one really quick, a little interlude, with Barry: I think it was about two years ago, I was on tour in Europe and I was playing this amazing venue in Milan, the San Fidel theater, which is one of these multi-speaker venues, kind of underground. And a lot of the speakers are handmade and it's like - I don't know how many speakers they have, like 48 or something. But I played this show in this amazing venue. And then, immediately after playing, this woman came up to me and said, "Oh, there's someone I would like to like you to meet." And I looked over and it was Barry Truax, who I hadn't seen in probably at least 10 years. And he was standing there and we had a big hug and I kind of, I'm like, "What are you doing here?" But yeah, anyway, on the other side of the world to have your old prof who's retired now - to [have him] show up and be at one of your concerts was pretty mind blowing.

Darwin: That's amazing. Now you keep on phrasing it as Communication coursework. But you also say that you came out with a combination Communication and Music degree. What was the Communication part and what was the Music part and how did, how were those separated in the process that you went through?

Scott: So the way that SFU is organized, there's an actual department, the School of Communications is considered an applied science and it's a very vast and massive faculty that covers Public Policy and Communications Law, I mean, we, we touch on copyright. There's like media studies and understanding the classic kind of Marshall McLuhan school of media analysis and media criticism. And then there's the more practical branches of marketing. And I didn't take any of that stuff, but there was a thread in that faculty that Barry oversaw, which was the acoustic communications portion, which they had. I mean, one of the other things is, compared to the music department, they just had better funding. So they had a bigger studio and more computers.

More equipment and a more vast array of equipment and a full time staff member to keep it all going. And there was definitely an overlap, and Barry himself was a joint professor with the music department, but the music department had its own separate studios. And they also clearly had courses in acoustic writing, like writing for instruments. And I actually took two years of Gamalon while I was there as well. So they had a completely separate and much more musically minded program versus communications, which touched more on all of these other topics.

Darwin: So it was a real traditional thing. I mean like, did you put yourself through things like sight singing and all that kind of stuff?

Scott: Yeah, there were courses where we had to do some sight-singing. It wasn't as rigorous as maybe a classical music style, a performance-oriented music degree program. But it was definitely more varied. I mean, I had some amazing instructors like Rudolph Commerce teaching mid-century modern approaches to, I mean like the Schoenberg School of kind of abandoning tradition and sort of inventing your own new way of writing music like that. It was sort of that mindset versus the classically-minded mindset. But anyway, those were definitely pretty fundamental for me in terms of opening my ears and mind to new ideas and how technology could be involved in making music.

Darwin: Right. Well, what's interesting to me is unlike a lot of people who come out of a university with sort of a very traditional traditional music perspective, maybe with a little avant-garde sprinkled into, it sounds to me like you came having a lot of challenges to tradition already having been presented to you. So you didn't necessarily need to go through some sort of shocking process in order to get those part of your life right.

Scott: No, in fact, it's interesting because I've always looked, I mean if you want to call it the other side, but if I've always looked to the other side of a more classically-driven music traditions in awe anytime I like. I have a really good friend not far from you in Madison, Wisconsin who plays cello for the Madison Symphony. And we've collaborated and we have another project that we do together. And his physical ability to play that instrument just blows my mind. I look at it as like, "Ah, I really missed out", I will never achieve what he is achieving because I didn't start early enough and I never picked a single instrument. I became a master of none. And I am very envious of of that. And similarly never, never studied piano and I still struggle with like my scales on a keyboard, believe it or not. But so some of those things I look at from my perspective as a fairly fumbly, self-taught exploration driven musician. I look at that side with awe and envy because I just don't have that skillset.

Darwin: I guess. But one thing I would say that I found really interesting about your music, and I think the reason it captures a lot of people's attention is that, it is at its core fairly ambient, but you actually build in things like chord changes and structures and those kind of things that are often very subtle. They're often not pushed to the forefront in a sort of a classical way, but it really is an intrinsic part of what provides the movement to the piece. And hence to me what ends up happening is that there is a satisfaction when you get to an end of piece because structurally it feels like it was composed. It's more to me than people whose work is sort of like sound designerly as its focus.

Scott: Yeah. I think I consider myself a composer and even though a lot of those structures you're speaking of are simple, I enjoy finding sort of a narrative and finding shape and finding surprise in creating. And I think that's a compositional saying versus - like you said. I do get a lot of satisfaction from also just creating soundscapes and more amorphous washes of sound. But to me, the driving thing is to actually compose. And I think I've learned of late, like my last record really has these ties to photography and I think visually there's a very, there's a very similar approach when you think of composing a photograph and looking for something that is almost a visual hook and then finding a way to frame it. And there's a lot of crossbreeding of ideas with other media, in terms of how to shape things in an appealing way. And I think that's composition, even if it's in a really basic form, it's composition.

Darwin: Sure. That makes a lot of sense to me. Now, one of the things that in the interviews I've read about you have pretty consistently talk about is the fact that your primary instrument, at least for the Loscil work, is the computer. And you're pretty unabashed in saying that that's your instrument, that's the place where you feel like you have virtuosity and where you've put your time. How does that match up with the fact that you have this background also with guitar and drums and saxophone and all this other stuff? I mean, how does that feel like an instrument to you in the way those other things might have and how did maybe working with conventional instruments also inform you of how you would end up using the computer?

Scott: Yeah, that's an interesting question.

Darwin: Maybe there is no connection.

Scott: Yeah, I don't know. I think it's funny because I'm tracing back. I think that one of the earliest moments, you know where I realized the computer was central and interesting to me was when I could get my own computer. I think it was 1995: I had a student loan that had just enough money and I decided to just blow it all on a Power PC Mac that I could have at home. And that was the first computer that I literally had sitting at home. Cause otherwise I was using computers at the lab, at school or you are in the studios at school. And there was something about the autonomy of having that studio-in-a-box type idea at all times accessible. And when the moment struck of being inspired or wanting to try something out, there was this very powerful tool sitting there and it was available and I was ready to go.

And there's something about that immediacy that just became very natural for me to turn to the computer. And I mean, not to mention exposure to things like Max/MSP, and before that Csound, these ways of creating sound in ways of building things that felt really like my own in some strange way. Even though I'm clearly dependent on all of the engineering and all of the technology that has come before me, there's this idea that I have so much power in my hands right now that I can conceive of something and work towards it and you can do it at almost any time of the day. And there was something about that that just pulled me in and I've just never really found the same equivalent with other tools. You know, like, synthesizers have never really caught my attention in the way that I keep wanting to get more into synthesis, but I just can't, I just can't. I like to work with in a sculptural way with sounds that I've taken from the world. So they're complex sounds that I'm usually treating and almost chiseling away at. And synthesis kind of is the opposite. You're working with fundamentals and building out and I've always felt like working from something or working from nothing to something versus something to nothing, it's just easier for me.

Darwin: Um, so what, what tools do you use to get your, to do your stuff?

Scott: These days, the centerpiece of most of my composition and performance is Ableton, and when Max for Live came onto the scene... I mean up until Max for Live, I was building my own sequencers in Max and I think it was the transition from Max 4 to 5 that there was just too much work to do to keep my patches going, and it was around the same time that Ableton and Max for Live showed up. So I was able to kind of port some of the core ideas are the core patches over to Max for Live and then use Ableton for most of the sequencing.

Darwin: Sure. That's interesting. So in doing that, how often do you find yourself like diving into Max for Live to do sound development or are you able to do a lot of that just within Ableton itself? I mean, do you have like a bag of Max tricks that you use?

Scott: Yeah, it's funny like Max also became a tool for problem solving for me that is always there and I know that it's there if I need it. For example, for years working in video games, I could not find really good software to do the kind of batch processing I wanted to do. For example it's a very common thing in video games to have dialogue - like voiceover - that is processed to sound like it's coming over a radio, right? Like a CB radio. And at the time I couldn't find a tool that could batch process things in a convenient way. So I built my own in Max. Like to me, Max is this great resource to have to just when there's nothing else available, you can build your own thing and so I use it for a lot of nuts and bolts work.

Now, for example, I am using Ableton for audio, but I use this program Resolume for video when I play live. And I found that the resolution of sending MIDI for things like opacity fades from Ableton to Resolume was too course - it maybe being 128 [steps]. So I wanted to use OSC for that, but Ableton doesn't have any built in OSC so I built a Max patch to make that communication possible. So in that sense I'm using it all the time for nuts and bolts work and problem solving, but it's become less of a core thing for sound design for me.

Darwin: You actually mentioned something that was the next thing I wanted to ask about, which was development of visuals. I mean you've got, with some of your work, you've actually got some really nice video content that goes along with it anyway. But you also talk about doing visuals during performance; even at the very beginning of your work as Loscil you talked about there being sort of like an AV aspect to the thing that you and your friends were doing. How did you get tied into working on visuals and how does working on visuals either align and parallel what you do with audio - or how might it be completely different?

Scott: Yeah, the visual side of my work has come and gone over the years. And it was a fundamental part at the very beginning from a very experimental perspective of just trying to see what you could do with visuals. And in those early days, we're talking late 90's, what was available for visual stuff was pretty rudimentary. And I think I even was using Macromedia Director, right? Because it had a plugin that could read the audio level from an input and you could map that. And I had some Director background from working in multimedia, so I understood it enough that I could build some connections. But I got frustrated with the computer power at the time - [it] was not capable of doing much very interesting visual stuff and you couldn't really play, like, video files.

You had to do generative stuff. And it just ended up looking like a glorified VU meter or a screensaver. And I got really frustrated with the lack of ability to express with those tools. So I abandoned it and went audio only for many years. But then in the last, I don't know, 5 or 6 years, I've gotten really heavily back into making my own video and really enjoy it and enjoy the kind of parallels between music making and finding interesting connections between musical passages and visual shapes or themes. And I think I've gotten to a point where I feel really comfortable with it and I feel really happy with the ability to express myself using those tools. And now I'm almost conceiving new work with visuals in mind and I'll have a plan that's how I envision a live performance as a whole, like as both an audio [and] visual whole.

Darwin: Interesting. I saw a video piece, I think it was for one of the Equivalents tracks, that had these cloud forms. I don't know to what extent you compose that visual or if it was just that there's this thing that happens sometimes where, if you have audio, when you have an interesting moving video, your mind will just like work really hard to find a cool connection between the two. I'm not sure what the story was with that, but I would just be hypnotized because to me I was hearing things and like seeing changes. I was like, "Aw man, it's cool how those effects are tied together." And I was like, "Yeah, I do that sometimes too." And it's normally that I just literally take a video, slap an audio on it. It's like, "Oh shit, look all that work." You know, it just works.

Scott: I know. I mean my whole life I've relied to some extent on happy accidents for sure. But I do also like designing some of those connections and I find it really satisfying. Like there's something, even just as I use a lot of two-dimensional geometric shapes on top of video imagery, like from the real world and like, I love that. I sort of like when a bass note comes in, you can tie that to a giant black circle on the screen. There's just something really satisfying about that synchronization that that I can't get enough of. I don't know.

Darwin: It's, it's hard though in doing that to not not also end up with that sort of like a clown-dunking kind of a thing where every time this happens the clown's in the water. And so it takes a while to actually get out of the idea of saying synchronization doesn't mean a robotic slaving to something like that either.

Scott: No, I know, I know what you're saying. And I think it's a delicate balance of trying to use these tools and it's the same with within one medium. Like when you talk about music and like you talk about repetition and you always want to find that place for repetition gives you something positive and maybe you take it to the edge where it's about to become something negative. I mean you think of Philip Glass and Steve Reich as masters of this and it's like you take it, you take it to that edge of "Oh, this is about to become really annoying." And then it goes somewhere else. and that in itself becomes really satisfying. And I think there's something about that with visual stuff too, that you almost build a language of expectation, but then you break that expectation and that becomes itself kind of satisfying.

Darwin: So true - now as a person who is really who really uses the computer as instrument, when you play live, what does that look like? How, how do you build a system or a structure that gives you the freedom to be performative when you're live but also takes advantage of the fact that you have this amazing studio-in-a-box and can kind of make all the noise and if you want to, you could completely script a performance. What does your balance look like and how do you make it so that it's a valid expression tool for yourself.

Scott: Yeah, it's a funny conversation cause I actually went through years of struggling with this idea and I think I just in the last number of years, I've done a couple of really subtle things that have helped me. I don't know whether they help the audience, but adding visuals is actually one thing where it's maybe to just distract from the idea that I'm standing there pressing buttons or whatever. The other thing is just visually I can't stand seeing that Apple logo on screen or on stage, you know? And so I actually try to hide my laptop to the side and I actually have trained myself to not need to look at it. And so I have controllers that I use a couple of AKAI controllers at the moment, but I've been through so many different MIDI controllers over the years.

But what I usually like to have is some combination of a mixer, that allows me to bring things in and out trigger. I'm triggering live clips, obviously doing some effects, sends in some, some live processing. And then I have, at the moment, a keyboard as well where I'm playing and I have some mini-loopers and stuff so I can kind of play on the keyboard and grab things and loop them and layer them over top of some preestablished structures. I used to feel compelled to do more in terms of live spur of the moment construction of ideas. And for a while I had a little tabletop slide guitar that I was playing and grabbing stuff from and processing and I just found like compositionally I couldn't achieve what I wanted to achieve - and I stopped being worried about this idea, that the art I'm presenting is the art I'm presenting. And if you consider there's some sort of spectrum from complete free improvisation to complete playback of a theatrical movie with score, I'm somewhere in the middle and I'm kind of content with that. I don't feel like I need to do anything more, anything less. This is my art and this is how I present it.

Darwin: That's really cool. And that's a awesome perspective. So unfortunately our time is already up. I can't believe it. But, before we go, I'd like to ask, ask you what is next? What's around the corner for you and what new work might you might you have in the hopper?

Scott: I am really interested in photography and part of my the Equivalence record, which just came out in August, has this tie to not only the work of Alfred Stieglitz, the early 20th century photographer, but also to my own photography. This is becoming a new thing for me connected to the visual element of my life performance. I'm really interested in the visual element of presenting music and photography together. And so I have an idea for a project that is basically a photo book with an accompanying music that, the music doesn't exist yet, but the photos are kind of there and some thinking about a way to kind of bring that to life. And then I just finished working on, games as sort of score for a game that is out now. It's called Lifelike. And I'm working on, perhaps, a soundtrack release for that.

Darwin: That sounds great. And then you also mentioned the collaboration that you're doing with the cellist. Do you have any releases that,

Scott: Yeah, we have one that came out a couple of years ago, so the project is called High Plains and we actually had a residency in Wyoming a few years back and sort of built this record on site and Kranky released it a couple of years ago. So it's out there if you want to check it out. Mark and I have, you know, we're constantly in conversation about what to do next, but we haven't found the path for next collaboration. But yeah that's always hovering around too.

Darwin: Well, Scott, I really want to thank you for taking the time out of your schedule to have this chat. It was really great to get to learn a little bit more, and to imagine how you do the things you do. You're so thoughtful about this stuff, and I love talking to people that put that kind of energy into the process.

Scott: Oh, it's been a pleasure. And it's a, yeah. It's nice after seeing your name for so many years to actually have a conversation with you.

Darwin: Well, I appreciate it, man. And with that, I will let you have the rest of your day. Have a good one. Bye!

Copyright 2019 by Darwin Grosse. All right reserved.

Become a Patron!