Sound Branding
Something interesting has happened to tv adverts over the last few years, and i suspect it can be traced back to Intel adverts in the early 90s. It seems to be a growing trend particularly in big international brands, and I find it espacially annoying. I'm talking about the practice of 'sound branding', I call it this because I can't find any official title for it, perhaps 'audio logo' is more appropriate, some might even call it a jingle. The all to familiar "bing-bong-bing-bing" which invaded your consciousness in 1991 accompanied Intel-Inside adverts, then due to an interesting piece of marketing Intel subsidised other adverts for products which used the intel chips. A clever move which ensured Intel's sonic stamp has been placed on thousands of adverts ever since.
This sparked something of a revolution, over the subsequent years more and more brands adopted audio logos, infuriatingly catchy yet somehow subconscious, I imagine you would find the majority of regular tv watchers could associate a visual and audio logo, probably without even realising it. I wonder what people's thoughts are on this? Does it add richnes in this multimedia age we are living in? Is it a crude onslaught under the guise of multimedia? Do these things work? What do they achieve? The obvious benefit of a visual logo is the repetition in a number of locations, specifically in the shop where you buy the goods advertised. You recognise the Hovis logo from the advert and then see it emblazoned across the loaf of bread in Tesco's, but what advantage is gained from an audio logo?
So, dynamo members, what do you think? (de-de-la-la-de)
please log in to add a comment
posted by Malcolm Garrett
on 02 August 2007
Intel Inside.
The reason Intel paid for so many other manufacturer's adverts which used that three(?) note 'jingle' is of course because they themselves had nothing specific to sell directly to consumers, but felt they needed to position themselves as the world's premier supplier of microchips - itself a vague and not readily comprehensible (from an ordinary consumer perspective) component part of computers.
The 'Intel Inside' promotion could on a conceptual level be seen as being incredibly sophisticated, albeit with a 'dumb' realisation of the concept. It obviously worked very well for them, although annoyingly for us, because that phrase quickly came to suggest that any computer without 'Intel Inside' was somehow deficient or second rate.
Even Apple fell for it and redeveloped their own products with Intel chips, although interestingly they have so far never promoted or stickered their products with the 'Intel Inside' branding, which even now still refers only to PCs.
Microsoft also went a step further with audio branding, hiring no lesser figure than Brian Eno to 'compose' the Windows™ start up sound, and then licensing the Rolling Stones song 'Start Me Up' to promote the launch of Windows™ 98 in a clumsy attempt to appear 'on the edge' and in touch with 'the kids on the street'.
In the computer world Apple, whose products (unlike Wintel machines) had always utilised sound as a fundamental interface component, have arguably been much more subtle in their approach. Who would have noticed back in 1984 that one of their original system sounds, the catchily named 'Sosumi' ("So, Sue Me!" geddit?) would be a direct dig at The Beatles' Apple Corps initial objections to Apple Computer using 'their' name?
Who would have noticed how apparent it was even then that Steve Jobs had always had a sound-based company objective in mind for Apple, and it was likely that products such as iTunes and iPod were beginning to formulate in his mind from the start?
Sound is quite clearly a very powerful component that advertisers, manufacturers and media owners are beginning to re-assess in their never ending bid to get inside our hearts and minds. I don't think it is quite so simplistic as to perceive this as a new kind of 'jingle' we are hearing, and I think that we are yet to witness yet more sophisticated ways in which audio messages will be brought to our ears in subtle and subliminal ways.
posted by dan kirby
on 03 August 2007
‘ooh danone’
I have to admit a vested interest here – in that I run (with Martyn Ware from Illustrious) a company that does exactly this, which is called Sonic ID. See www.sonic-id.com
We feel that sound is an important sense that is massively underused, in both the design/branding world, but across our wider culture
By using sonic/audio design, brands are simply finding another way to communicate to people in a strategic way...
Surely that throws open massive creative and communication opportunity – particularly in an increasingly non-physical world (eg podcasts / digital downloads), globalisation, and diffused consumer touchpoints. For example, a Sonic ID solution – done correctly – doesn’t have to be translated...
As with most design, there are good ways of doing things, and bad ways. I am sure we can all point to bad graphic design, or poor interactive design. Done correctly, sound should enhance the brand and consumer experience.
Brand people spend a lot of time talking about ‘tone of voice’ – well we can now quite literally create that tone of voice.
This fits into a wider trend of ‘sensory branding’ – using sight, sound, touch, smell and taste. See www.brandsense.com
posted by Zoe Black
on 20 August 2007
men who stare at goats
Last year we had a really interesting NMK event about sonic branding, it came from reading the Jon Ronson book - 'men who stare at goats' which examines how the american military use sound as an interogation/torture technique. thinking about this and also some of the subliminal suggestion techniques that are available - i think more research needs to be done into this whole area.
posted by James Bull
on 19 September 2007
The sound of science
Companies today need to communicate compellingly across many platforms, so sound is very important. Many brands are met far more through TV, radio, and online than they are through printed material.
I believe that corporate identity systems shouldn't be 'designed' on paper and then repurposed into movement and sound. Knowing that it will have to live across all platforms and points of touch, it doesn’t make sense not to consider that from the beginning. We do that by working across four disciplines (Static, Moving, Sonic and Responsive) from the beginning – check out www.movingbrands.com
Sonic is our term for 'sound' - when we roll out a brand we automatically make a sound version of the logo (we call them Sonic Mnemonics), along with a whole array of sonic assets including brand music, ring tones, Sonic User Interface design - and all these assets come from a Sonic Brand Platform - which ensures consistency across sound, voice and music (if you like, guidelines and parameters for sound creation). Clients are increasingly looking for this approach when creating/refreshing their CI system.
On the scientific side of things there is a load of data out there that can explain that hearing is a much more compelling and memorable media than seeing can be… some suggesting that this is also due to the fact that hearing is one of the first senses to develop while still in the womb. Also it is widely regarded that sound is directly hardwired to our emotions and memory because it is stored in the same parts of the brain that deal with those processes. This is why we associate sound with events and times in our lives – so the fact that the song you hear on the radio reminds you of an exact childhood memory is just because the brain uses sound to help signpost its memory banks.
It doesn’t take a genius to work out that if we can create associations between sound and a brand, consumers will remember and associate with it much more easily.
posted by Matt Cooper
on 20 September 2007
Use and misuse
I'm fascinated to hear from professionals working in this field, my main complaint comes from the misuse of these techniques. My reference to Hovis was an idle one but draws reference to the brands out there who are using sonic branding 'because they can' rather than 'because its right for them'.
Intel use of sound was masterful because of the strict limits they had to work with. I wonder if there are other brands or companies out there who are working in these same constraints who would benefit from stronger sonic brands.
Would those of you working with sonic branding draw the line anywhere, or should all brands have a 'sonic element'?
posted by James Bull
on 26 September 2007
Sonic element
Your right about 'because they can' rather than 'because it's right'... The point is that these sonic elements need to be created as part of the over-all identity system (considered part of the normal set of assets delivered as part of a CI). When they are not developed in this way they can suffer form having little tie-in with the brand and identity itself.
All brands and companies can benefit from having stronger sonic brand elements... and those who do have them do definitely get better recognition and recall with consumers. I would ague that every brand or business can and should use sound to reinforce it's message and offer – whether a large global or a local business, sonic can make a difference...
We need to widen the conversation from sonic Mnemonic (sound logo) and music to also thinking about product sound design, ALT and Environments... as the sounds these make all inform the brands perception with consumers.
posted by noel franus
on 09 November 2007
Build it and they will come
Great topic. And this is the right forum for spreading the word ... the practices of experience design, interaction design and information architecture have evolved very much like audio branding, sonic branding and audio identity will.
For instance: in the early days of the web, most creatives were very happy just to be making cool stuff and being paid to do so. But over the course of a few years, companies demanded more, and a handful of web folks started figuring out, mostly on their own, the difference between a very cool site and a very successful site. Their value to their clients (and their clients' brands) skyrocketed, and on the other side of the "user experiences" websites and digital apps became much easier to use.
How'd it happen? These folks started sharing ideas with one another. They built a common language. Best practices evolved. Books were published, communities were spawned and the rest was history...now most interactive design firms can't survive without well-versed information architects, interaction designers, content strategists, etc.
Audio branding is still looking up the mountain right now. A few firms like Elias Arts and Sonic ID are pushing the envelope. But in the very near future music, sound, voice and silence will be commonly accepted as tools that must be brand-based and always thoughtfully applied within the context of use. What will it take to get there? More talk. More inspiration, more socializing of ideas and work. It's inevitable!
posted by noel franus
on 09 November 2007
And by the way...
Reiterating from that last paragraph...audio must always "thoughtfully applied within the context of use."
UX matters has a good writeup on that: <a href="http://www.uxmatters.com/MT/archives/000200.php">Audio and the User Experience</a>.
posted by James Bull
on 02 January 2008
On the lighter side of serious
A little while ago (2006) I was asked to high-light and comment on the worlds top sonic brands for The Independent. It's not in-depth but still relevant.
http://www.movingbrands.com/pages/home/press?id=26&page=2
oh and happy new year!
posted by DARPAN JAIN
on 12 August 2008
Music Equity
Well, Its a very Nice topic for discussion and enlighted commets....In recent yrs thr has been a significant role of music in Not only adverttisments but it is also leveraged by company in customer care services, Company's retial outlet and compnay's Annual Meetings... One aspect Increase role of music/ Sound is that it aroses Affective responses more as compared to any other brand element besides studies have validated the fact it is easy to remember the Music/ Sound than words... Advertising companies have found that when they turn their slogan or product information into lyrics set to music, their message is better remembered and recalled.
I am also working on the project on sonic Branding and as such have gathered many information in respect to it.....however i am not able to find out the differnece between Music Equity ( The Role of Music in Branding) and Sonic Branding...