Quick..Which logo is more appealing to you?

RizbIT

Member
EDIT:

This is the desing I have decided to go with and now its just a case of choosing the main colour. Which one looks best:

logo_beatdrops_promo.jpg


Previous Logo Designs:
Which logo do you think looks better? 1,2 or 3

1:
logo2_512.png

2:
logo512-512.png

3:
logo3.png

4 (last one)
logo4-512.png

Its for a music creation app

Thanks
 
Last edited:

NeoShade

Member
I like number one as well, but to me it feels very similar to the iTunes logo. I know it's not the same, in fact there are a lot of differences, but it just feels like someone thought "Hey, iTunes is a popular music thing. Let's just mess around with their logo and use it for our app." I know that's probably not what you did at all, but I'm just putting it out there.
 
K

KarateMan

Guest
The first one, But it heavily resembles the old Itunes logo. I would try for a new one.
 
I have to agree with @Rayek. Both styles look like some sort of playback app as opposed to creation, and the tilt on the first one is off-putting; the different layers with the individual colours will also blend in on a small phone's screen, just looking like a colourful blotch, which could be nice, but ruins the initial effect. Neither state what the app is actually supposed to do.
 

flerpyderp

Member
Both styles look like some sort of playback app as opposed to creation
I agree with this and think it is an important point to consider. I can't think of any music creation software that uses a notation symbol as its logo (I don't doubt they exist), but when I see a logo with one of those symbols as its primary feature, I immediately think of any other type of music software than one for creating music.

Look at all the well known DAWS, like FL Studio, Ableton, Reaper, LLMS, Caustic and so on. They all have recognisable logos without resorting to a generic looking musical note. That isn't to say that you look at them and immediately think "that must be music creation software", more that you don't look at them and think "just another music player/whatever".
 

chance

predictably random
Forum Staff
Moderator
I think #2 has more promise. The tipped pair of eight notes reminds me of a piano player hunched over a keyboard. The notes are his head and hands.

I'd develop that idea further, but keep it abstract. For example, make the single note (the stemmed eight note) much smaller, and maybe add a couple more. They could signify music flowing from the keyboard.

There's potential for something interesting there.
 

sylvain_l

Member
1

but both very generic and going to agree with BattleRiffle BR55, I too associate the music note more with a player than a music creation app
 

RizbIT

Member
I think #2 has more promise. The tipped pair of eight notes reminds me of a piano player hunched over a keyboard. The notes are his head and hands.

I'd develop that idea further, but keep it abstract. For example, make the single note (the stemmed eight note) much smaller, and maybe add a couple more. They could signify music flowing from the keyboard.

There's potential for something interesting there.
Thanks for the ideas.

The notes on logo two were meant to represent letters B and d from the name of the app.
 

Toque

Member
Maybe on the second one a hammer and a note. (Instead of a nail).
Construction of music and not a player.

Or ruler ............ something simple implying builder.

Or pencil.......
 

Rayek

Member
Although I agree the third one is too literal, I do think the geometric patterns inside that warped "egg" shape might prove to be a potential inspiration for something more original looking and interesting (and not as literal).
 

Posh Indie

That Guy
The way gradients are used in all of them is a turn-off to me, personally. It gives it the look that many music apps suffer from, which is, "This looks like it was made in PowerPoint with clip art".

Your display picture, for instance; It looks great, but I think without the blue to black gradient it would look better (Cleaner). It removes the, "I added gradients just because" vibe.

Maybe I am just anti-gradient, though, haha.
 

RizbIT

Member
The way gradients are used in all of them is a turn-off to me, personally. It gives it the look that many music apps suffer from, which is, "This looks like it was made in PowerPoint with clip art".

Your display picture, for instance; It looks great, but I think without the blue to black gradient it would look better (Cleaner). It removes the, "I added gradients just because" vibe.

Maybe I am just anti-gradient, though, haha.
My last design, ignore the rough edges its just the design a new concept broken notes being put together to make music, different colour symbolise different categories of sounds

logo4-192.png
 

Rayek

Member
My last design, ignore the rough edges its just the design a new concept broken notes being put together to make music, different colour symbolise different categories of sounds

View attachment 20683
Welcome to Windows! :p

That, and the broken music notes don't work at all. You need to let go of the music notes. It's too literal. Be more inventive and less obvious.



 
Your logo should resemble something unique about the app. An icon that would stand out so that it's not confused with something else. Have like an abstract instrument, or a pair of headphones, or a treble cleft. Idk, something different.

If I were to choose one though, it would probably be 1.
 

Jabbers

Member
I also like number 2 out of the bunch. It is visually interesting and looks unique.

No. 1 immediately reminded me of the iTunes logo too. It looks too much like a multicolour version of the icon third from the left in post 15. That background effect also looks suspiciously like a music visualiser from iTunes lol.

No. 3 isn't visually pleasing. It looks too chaotic.

No. 4 is too much like the Windows logo. Those coloured grids already have a deep-rooted association with Microsoft in the minds of many, so don't even go there.
 

Geoff Jones

Member
Whenever I see the glossy button logo thing, I think 2007 and the original iPhone. It doesn't make me think of a cutting-edge app.
 

NeoShade

Member
I actually really like number 4 a lot. Needs some polishing up, but otherwise I think it's pretty solid. Perhaps changing some of the colours wouldn't hurt though, to make it less Windowsy.

I also disagree with others regarding the music notes forcing me to think of a music player rather than a music creation tool. I think it's perfectly valid for both.

I also has a spur of the moment idea and mocked this up:
 

JeffJ

Member
It's extremely simple, but I actually like the notion @NeoShade is toying with; the blueprint-like look definitely leads my mind into creation-app territory. The Xcode icon does something similar (with a hammer and blueprint background). I would maybe explore that further.
 
Whenever I see the glossy button logo thing, I think 2007 and the original iPhone. It doesn't make me think of a cutting-edge app.
I hear what you're saying, but what's the answer to that? "Design a boring, flat, two or three color 'modern' logo like everyone else that'll also look outdated in five years?"
Does everything created need to be a direct product of its time? Does every piece of graphic design need to follow the latest (extremely boring, in my opinion) trend?

The pragmatist in me says "yes, it does. You need to attract people to your app, even if you need to sell your soul to do it," but that's lame and depressing.
The artist in me says "no, you can do whatever the hell you want. Bring back the 90s logos that actually had color and texture!"

The pragmatist in me is probably right and would almost definitely win out if I was creating a logo though, lol. Sigh.

All that out of the way: I agree with a lot of people here that a music note feels a bit like a music player, since it's so common. If I were creating a DAW or something and wanted to use something related to music, I'd use something obscure, or at the very least one of the musical clefs or something. Something a musician or a composer would recognize more than the average person. Finale's app logo is an f for Finale, but it's stylized to look like a forte symbol. Sibelius' logo is a treble clef. Or you could skip the musical symbols altogether (though I don't think you have to) - plenty of music programs just have their initials or whatever as their logos.

1 and 4 are my favorites, but my first thought with 4 is "Windows logo, lol," so I dunno about that one. 1 is cheesy as hell, but I still kind of like it. Looks fun, if that's what you're going for. If that's not what you're going for, you'll probably want something a bit more understated, like NeoShade's example.

Good luck!
 
N

NeonBits

Guest
I like the first one. The second one looks suggestive and feels as if something gonna fail, but it would look good if the note would be in a subtle angle instead of falling. The third one, you're the only one to know what you're seeing; if it represents the project, maybe place on front one symbol of each category? Of course, the fourth is horrible, feels like "I'm another Windows-logo-fan".
 

sylvain_l

Member
my try at mixing the idea of blueprint from NeoShade and your love for note with a little bit of more DAWesc thing of mine.
GMC-logo-for-music-creator-app-blueprint.png GMC-logo-for-music-creator-app-blueprint-colorfull.png
left is to flat for me; and reusing your vivid color (note exact match but just to have an idea) its >_< ouch my eyes
perhaps with a single note...
 

Geoff Jones

Member
I hear what you're saying, but what's the answer to that? "Design a boring, flat, two or three color 'modern' logo like everyone else that'll also look outdated in five years?"
Does everything created need to be a direct product of its time? Does every piece of graphic design need to follow the latest (extremely boring, in my opinion) trend?

The pragmatist in me says "yes, it does. You need to attract people to your app, even if you need to sell your soul to do it," but that's lame and depressing.
The artist in me says "no, you can do whatever the hell you want. Bring back the 90s logos that actually had color and texture!"
The pragmatist in me is probably right and would almost definitely win out if I was creating a logo though, lol. Sigh.

Good luck!
lol, 2007 is at that awkward stage where it's not quite old enough to be "retro" and not new enough to be "cool"... Maybe in another decade it will be cool again to have glossy buttons :p
 

Jabbers

Member
Ah yes... I loved the high-gloss, faux-texture days of brushed aluminum windows, curvy recycle bins, and neon clock widgets. The mid 2000s was a weird time for design, but it was fun.

I really hated flat aesthetic at first, but I enjoy the simplicity of it now. It's hard to imagine where it will go in the future... but I suspect we aren't going to go backwards to tacky, complex design-- not when it comes to computer interfaces. We'll probably move into VR, AR, and wearables which make use of the real world more. Why, a person from the future is probably reading this message on their computer glasses "right now"... spooky...

... uh... good luck with the icon lol.
 

RizbIT

Member
I actually really like number 4 a lot. Needs some polishing up, but otherwise I think it's pretty solid. Perhaps changing some of the colours wouldn't hurt though, to make it less Windowsy.

I also disagree with others regarding the music notes forcing me to think of a music player rather than a music creation tool. I think it's perfectly valid for both.

I also has a spur of the moment idea and mocked this up:
TBH i do like that idea
 

RizbIT

Member
This is the desing I have decided to go with and now its just a case of choosing the main colour. Which one looks best:

logo_beatdrops_promo.jpg

Which logo do you think looks better? 1,2, 3 or 4
 
A

Andy

Guest
A good logo should be recognizable in duotone (in my opinion anyway):

I would choose green out of these 4 choices. It feels natural and stable.
 
Top