Band Identity Question
- Started
- Last post
- 21 Responses
- mg33
Got a question for all of you. Aside from (hopefully) good songs, are you more attracted to a band that has a solid and cohesive visual identity, or one that has a range of creativity in promo materials like posters, flyers, etc?
I ask this because, we're changing our band name from The Atlantic Divide to Looming Lights. It's by no means any kind of earth shattering local music event or anything, we just decided that with the effort we're making with a new album, going back to being a three-piece for a while, we want something new.
So the whole time we've been a band, my posters, font choices, imagery have been pretty varied. See www.mg33.net for examples. I love coming up with different posters, but with this new effort I'm really hoping to lock in on ONE thing, one really tight theme and good typography for the name.
It should be fun - I'll be working on a new site, posters, cd artwork, all kinds of stuff. Something a bit darker, something that doesn't tie me into ocean themes or imagery. Something that doesn't have to mean anything.
Just curious though - how much does an identity that you can recognize anywhere really enhance the overall appreciation of a band to you? Any particular bands identity you've consistently loved over time?
- shitehawke0
Well a consistent brand has worked for oasis, right down to the songwriting.
- zingkelpie
- Im here all week, try the fish!shitehawke
- Hahahamg33
- baseline_shift0
- Coheed and Cambria. Fanboys get this shit tatted all over em. They also have a type lock up that they use consistently. (i hate it though, so i didnt post it.)baseline_shift
- it though, so i didnt post it.)baseline_shift
- Scotch_Roman0
I think a band's identity should change with each album. I think NIN's ID works well, but they are the exception. Half of Reznor's schtick is his "brand" anyway.
An example of a continually well-done, but ever-changing look is Iron and Wine, done by Sub-Pop.
- I'm pretty much with you on that. Kind of how I'm approaching it.mg33
- david carson********
- Don't NIN allways use the same logo though...********
- That's my point about NIN. I'm saying I don't think staying the same works, except for them.Scotch_Roman
- *Doesn't typically work, I mean.Scotch_Roman
- ********0
ROLLING STONES
- monospaced0
Never in my life have I based my attraction to a band on their visual identity. Yeah, album art was cool and could influence a purchase back when we used to buy physical albums, but today it's nearly pointless.
Most people today find out about music by hearing it, either from a friend's playlist, on the radio, in a store, and then downloading the appropriate track or album. A visual identity gives the impression of trying to hard, and it won't necessarily be seen; it's a waste of time.
- +1 Sound first. Hawt visuals are nice, but secondary.baseline_shift
- kelpie0
do this:
http://www.joshfreese.com/
- Bluejam0
not that i was into their music, but their album covers were always a treat to look at.
http://images.google.co.uk/image…- didnt Tibor do a bunch of covers for them?baseline_shift
- yeah, he did.Bluejam
- ********0
too many words
- kelpie0
that depends monospaced; lot of bands are moving much more back to a point where the live gig is everything, and building a following from the ground up that way, a visual identity is still pretty important in that respect, factor in mirroring that groundswell online and you've another potential place it can have an impact. I don't think 'album art' per se is a big deal anymore, but the look/image outside of that is still v important.
music first, clearly, but isn't that stating the obvious?
- good point
BUT, if the music is fuckin' badass, the identity doesn't mattermonospaced - and I'd agree with preferring bands who change all the time, particularly if they always have some governing conceptkelpie
- course, yeah, but wrap it all together and you are goldenkelpie
- good point
- ********0
you should use you efforts towards your music...
let the record label do their job by branding you
- brains0
I find bands far more intriguing if they allow artists to take control of their posters / album art every time one is created. I hate "branded" bands, just furthers the fact that most of them are uninspired hacks.
- KwesiJ0
even unbranded bands are still branded they just don't seem that way or won't admit it
- ********0
I really liked your old name "Atlantic Divide" much better. It was distinctive and easy to remember, I already forgot your new name.
- fooler20
your a great designer but the music should speak for itself. Spend as much time on the music as your putting into the brand and you'll go places.
- mg330
fooler2,
Thanks - and we are. we're really taking our time with this new EP and not considering it done until it feels done. Our first demo was just a replica of what we did live. The album we did in 2006 was a little more involved since we had another guitarist at the time. This time, it's just three of us again but we're pulling out all the stops on the record - tons of guitars, keys, etc. and more overall sound than we do live. We'll working something out to get more into live shows at a later point.
- MikeColdFusion0
me personally, I think the most important thing about band artwork / visual identity is that it actually reflects the sound. its also one of those "no right way to do it" things. Just so long as it works.
- JackRyan0
I don't think a band's identity has any effect on me liking the music more or less...if it's good, I guess it adds something. But usually, I don't care at all. Also, in today's world of downloading music, most of the time I don't experience any of the identity anyways.
- ********0
- psenso0
etc