The science reference could be taken out completely, it's irrelevant. The dig at 8bc was long, drawn out and unnecessary. It took you 300 words to mention the artist on a blog that I'd imagine is going to be mostly read by chip-fans. You seem to focus on chiptunes being "hard", but I'd imagine the time learning any other instrument isn't taken into consideration when reviewing bands with guitars and such. I also thought the "funny" images dragged down the quality of what you were saying at times.
What I didn't like though particularly was singling an artist out for being bad somewhere in the middle. You say on one hand that chiptune is hard and you want to champion underrated artists, then you have a bit of a go at someone learning for themselves (on emulator, not on hardware, btw).
You've written 1558 words here, I feel that this (given the amount of irrelevant information) is too long. I'd rather be recommended an artist for every 500 words. Cut out the images, the chipmusic artists are hard-done-to references and just write about the artist and their music.
Good on you stepping up and giving this chipmusic blog a go, but these are the things I'd do to make it a bit more readable.
