Comments on: 2009-05-11 | Akustikkunst

By: Mitesh

Mitesh — Fri, 15 May 2009 18:24:30 +0000

I think it needs to be a bit more simple….

By: KrazyCeltic

KrazyCeltic — Tue, 12 May 2009 22:32:31 +0000

The vertical, on-its-side name doesn’t bother me. I see it on books on my bookshelf all the time.

By: brian

brian — Mon, 11 May 2009 14:37:48 +0000

would help if you spoke german…

By: DChuck

DChuck — Mon, 11 May 2009 12:57:37 +0000

meh… it’s ok I guess

By: Lars

Lars — Mon, 11 May 2009 10:25:12 +0000

Actually I really like it. You know the product and what it stands for before you get in touch with the logo itself. So this product in mind, it gets more than clear that the logo visualizes the effect of the product.
even without knowing the product at first I realized that thats a soundwave which fades out…

By: K.

K. — Mon, 11 May 2009 10:13:22 +0000

hmmm. . and what, boring logo isnt it?

By: rhea

rhea — Sun, 10 May 2009 17:58:39 +0000

I think the ‘keep it simple rule’ would apply here… not that you’re soliciting ideas, but how about: wave lengths leading up to Akustikkunst and that same line finishing off the logo in a straight line. Or not…

By: eric eriksson

eric eriksson — Sun, 10 May 2009 15:16:19 +0000

I like the idea. A lot. It makes you think but not for too long.

But.. I hate the use of the product name. Personally I would’ve skipped it alltogether and used the whitespace between the “waveforms” as the acoustic barrier, and have the name horizontally beneath. Also not entirely sure about the color-diferentiation over the gap, though I guess it adds to the need for pause before understanding it.

By: Conor

Conor — Sun, 10 May 2009 15:01:19 +0000

Don’t like it. Maybe it’s just me but having to turn your head sideways to read a logo doesn’t really work…

By: Alex

Alex — Sun, 10 May 2009 14:40:05 +0000

It really needs an explination to make sense.