It is pretty boring. On the other hand, you set a single word in Helvetica, so presumably that was your intention. :)

:) My intention was not boring. It was “neutral.” :)

I hope I’m not being too critical...

It looks like you didn’t spend much time at all on this design. I have tried band “logos” before, and they are tough. I would suggest spending an hour or more sketching and refining sketches. Put away the computer for a while and think about the message you are communicating.

evan
www.evanmade.com

well, it is neutral. So it works on that level.

This wants to have more going on.

How do you mean neutral? Do you mean it has no impact on the viewer? Neutral like a paper clip? Because I don’t think you have achieved that.

This leaves me with a slightly empty sense of incompletion. Although I do enjoy just sitting and admiring Helvetica...

Edited for grammar.

—
Nick Hladek

I love it. Might be biased though, as I love Helvetica.

Thanks a lot for the replies.

I get the same feeling as Nick, that it “wants” to have more going on, but I can’t quite put my finger on what that “more” is yet.

Evan, I spent about six hours on this. I stayed with my original idea of tight, bold lowercase Helvetica but the look went through some changes. I also played around with various “worn” looks, from worn paper to worn cloth before settling on the clean version. Once that was done, I played around with the box around it for quite a while.
I love design and especially working with type, but I’m a musician and I don’t do this for a living, so the gaps in my education have to be filled with a lot of tinkering. I understand that it probably would’ve taken a designer twenty minutes to go through the process I went through, but I’m slow with this stuff. :) (And paper’s not an option. I can’t draw my way out of a wet paperbag.)

By “neutral,” I meant that it’s not like grunged up blackletter — you see something like that, you know it’s going to have distorted guitars and screeching on it.

So — any ideas for some kind of “more” for this, anyone?

And the kerning’s OK then?

Tell more about the band and then maybe we can have a better idea of how to advise. The good part about designing a band logo is that you always have the option to remake your look form album to album, which most bands do.

Also, you may want to consider writing your band’s name as “central” instead of “Central” to provide connection between the logo and the name in print.

—
Nick Hladek

the way to do a great logo for a rock band is to listen the music of that band.
In my opinion there’s nothing “neutral”, no distorted guitar and no blackletter doesn’t mean neutral, it’s just another meaning.
So, where we can listen at you music?
I’m very curious.
____

MC

To me, the logo speaks of “definitive,” and the full stop at the end is very 2008. If you think (or want others to think) of your band as definitive 2008, you’ve nailed it. For example, Substance is definitive 1987. Or at least that’s what they intended, very obviously, it seems.

Oops. You asked about the kerning...

As for the kerning, the general rule, as far as I know, is not to kern lowercase. I’d type it and let it be. Did you squeeze the middle letters together? It looks a little forced and cramped. The negative space between the r and a and within the n call unnecessary attention to the lack of negative space on either side of the t. Considering all of that, I’d loosen it up a bit around the t.

To me the name is a bit “neutral” so I would try to make the logo a bit more interesting. Just think it out on paper first - even if you cannot draw, you can conceptualize in a way that you understand.

1. I think esthetic is spelled aesthetic.

2. Why does your band need a logo?

3. Not enough space between the “ntr”.

Boring? not quite. The logo says web2.0, which in turn says corporate target market 18-24, which in turn says conventional. Of course, I would avoid doing anything else to it. My take is that logos are not very rock and roll, as they traditionally used to sell stuff to people you haven’t met. Most people like to think of music as a one off gig, a relationship, a two-way thing. Logos say the opposite. They say “I know I can’t pick you out of a crowd and even if you spoke back I can’t hear you. This is great when purchasing hemorrhoid cream, not so great when trying to get a band off the ground. Even INXS needed to start facing the crowds.

This does not mean that band logos never work. Radiohead, after Kid A has used the same hand drawn all caps logo in subsequent albums without feeling corporate. Who can forget Weezer’s successful co-option of the Van Halen logo in a clever juxtaposition of indie rock and 80’s mega band. The success stories are few and far between however, for every one radio-heads there are 10 Maroon-5s.

If what you are going for is an element of subversion, I can see your logo working well. Especially for un-listenable noise rock. A kind of “ha-ha we tricked you with our logo” bent. If that is not the case, I would move away from perfection and introduce some esoteric elements to suggest that you don’t care so much about the logo. It would be far more rock and roll.

@cjeder: I think esthetic can also be spelled aesthetic, but no matter. “Aesthetic” is clearly the better spelling. The good part of band logos is that they can be reworked for each album, if not whim. So regardless if it’s very 2008, it works for the moment. Perhaps that was your point?

—
Nick Hladek

“neutral” - means the viewer doesn’t gain feelings good or bad when looking at it. I think this is the worst thing you want when looking at a band logo...

if the logo looks neutral, the music is probably too. how do you expect that to interest people if it’s set in the same font as most signage?

I also can’t believe you spent 6 hours on that.

http://www.counterfeitchic.com/Images/Yeasayer.jpg
http://www.impactmerch.com/home/files/images/categories/parliament_logo....
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q153/badicalbeats/presets.jpg
http://tootootbeepbeep.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/6479-large1.jpg
these logos at least makes you curious.

I know everyone is bashing the “neutral” idea. The logo looks like it belongs on the sleeve of a tee shirt...so as a t-shirt company’s logo it would be wonderful. Those are meant to be simple.

I’d say if you are designing it yourself, put yourself into it. Helvetica is a great default font because it is (#1) a GREAT font, lots of history and refining went into this. (#2) it’s a sponge. It can be anything, in a sense. SOOOOO MANY companies use Helvetica in their logos. So it’s not a bad font per se, but if you get the choice why not play around and explore some other fonts? A logo should speak without you there, especially a band logo I would think.

I also think a big problem with the logo is the word. I mean Central doesn’t shout “band”! Paired with helvetica in a lower caps, gray background, white lettering, overall smooth feeling, I’m thinking coffee shop. I’m not suggesting you change your band name of course, I am just laying that out there on the table as a possible issue to consider.

If you decide to go with the Helvetica logo, in the context of your site, I think left aligning the page is the way to go. There is something about centered Helvetica that doesn’t seem right, probably because I was extremely influenced by Swiss design in school.

Is your music “neutral.”? Does your music have soul? White lowercase Helvetica in gray background, very soulless. I like the lowercase Helvetica but make it a stencil, spray paint it on things... be a rebel, that’s rock and roll!!