Heavy Metal Typography

Jared Benson's picture

A friend of mine has asked to design the logo for his new band, "Gutterbäll" - His only criteria is that the logo should look "very heavy metal."

I certainly have some ideas of how to proceed, but before I post some examples, I wanted to open it up for discussion. What typographic treatments lend themselves for effective heavy metal-ness?

Feel free to post examples, or throw out ideas. And Yes, they have an umlaut over the "a", just for kicks.

jb

jay_wilkinson's picture

good... so what?

Miss Tiffany's picture

The above. If we must say we are elitist, I thought it would be nice to introduce a few more words that we can possibly use as well. And did you know there is a personality disorder attached?

Miss Tiffany's picture

Jay you are wrong. Look at the antonyms. Perhaps I'm leaning too far in the other direction, but you are wrong.

steve_p's picture

>>emotionally no one likes being talked down to. but when it happens to you or you're placed in that position it pushes you in one of two ways. 1-you make changes in yourself and strive for something higher. 2-you do nothing. this is illustrated well in school. there are those that fight the elitism found with in and remain ignorant. then there are those who rise to the challenge and learn new things becoming elitists themselves.

Jay, surely even you cannot think that talking down to someone automatically makes you (or anyone) right.
Therefore, when someone talks down to you, you still have to decide if they are correct or not, and act on their words or reject their words accordingly.
What you appear to be saying is that any of your students who disagree with your views are ignorant, whereas those who think you're right become little carbon copies of you.

Still you have described how elitists are made - when someone is talked down to by an elitist, and is too weak to think for themselves, they rise to the challenge of becoming patronising elitists themselves

Explains quite alot really...

steve_p's picture

>>you as the designer and they as the client automatically puts you in a position of elitism.

If this is true, then what if you're designing something for a company who makes the paper you buy in the course of your work?
Step outside of the office and into their shop, now you're not in the elitist role in a designer client relationship, they are in the elitist role in a paper manufacturer client relationship.

jay_wilkinson's picture

steve,

> What you appear to be saying is that any of your students who disagree with your views are ignorant,

c'mon steve i'm not that naive... of course they have the option.

> whereas those who think you're right become little carbon copies of you.

c'mon?.... people are in part a collection of many things they come across.

> Still you have described how elitists are made - when someone is talked down to by an elitist, and is too weak to think for themselves, they rise to the challenge of becoming patronizing elitists themselves

not really steve, they just become arrogant. arrogance and elitism are two different things.

> If this is true, then what if you're designing something for a company who makes the paper you buy in the course of your work? Step outside of the office and into their shop, now you're not in the elitist role in a designer client relationship, they are in the elitist role in a paper manufacturer client relationship.

now your kinda getting it. though the fact is it goes the other way. the paper company regards the designer as the consumer who they need to impress, so they will buy their product. the designer is put in the power position. i don't know the last time you went to a paper or print house as a designer but you most likely got the red carpet.

steve_p's picture

So the designer is in an elitist position as a purchaser, because the manufacturer needs to impress the designer to gain their custom.
And the designer is in the elitist position when dealing with their clients (the purchasers of design work) because they understand design better.
Is that what you're saying?

jay_wilkinson's picture

tiffany, elitist is not interchangeable with any of the words you listed. that's why these words have different definitions. they may get close in grey areas but are not the same thing. i think you've missed the point. arrogance is not elitism. arrogance is unfounded and naive condescension. please stop trying to lump them together.

jay_wilkinson's picture

steve, yes that's a big part of what i'm saying. just as a lawyer is in the upper position when you have a legal problem. it's a give and take but someone always has the upper hand. that's the way the human social system works. it's the dance all human cultures share.

jay_wilkinson's picture

hector, why'd you read this thread and then waste even more of your time posting to it? look at the top of your browser there's a back button.

here are a couple of parts from a few reviews i thought some of you might be interested in. it's for a book by William A. Henry, titled "in defense of elitism".

Published prior to the crescendo of criticism against affirmative action and related programs, William Henry's new book suggests an interesting interpretive framework. Put off by the excesses that result from extending good causes to the extreme, Henry focuses attention upon the dialectic between elitism and egalitarianism since World War II. In his view, egalitarianism has triumphed, thereby eliminating the creative tension between the two that fuels progress in American society and culture. To quote him, "the positive side of egalitarianism, the will to tolerance, [must be] coupled with the positive side of elitism, the intellectual suppleness to tolerate and accept diverse elements in society while holding firmly to one's own values'" to sustain the balance (194). With no check on its egalitarian tendencies, American culture loses the capacity to distinguish or to judge among alternatives.

William Henry was a two time winner of the Pulitzer Prize (once for reporting, once for criticism) and served as Time Magazine's culture critic.

gulliver's picture

Jay:

All of that might have been appropriate under a topic of "elitism in design" or something such. But this thread has gotten so far off topic as to be laughable.

Further, when anyone calls you on a point, such as justifying your definition of "logo" vs. "logotype" -- based only on your stated opinion against my three definitions (dictionary, historical context and Paul Rand's description), you rather deftly change the subject rather than meet the challenge.

This thread was about Heavy Metal Typography, but you have subverted it along a twisted path of rudeness, pseudo logic and unsubstantiated assertions.

Hector's point is well taken. I, too, am tired of this. Hand drawing a logo for a heavy metal garage band will hardly have any effect on "the problems that continue to plague American society." Your shifting of the discussion to a defense of elitism and its effect the work ethic in the world economy is simply a bizarre attempt to justify your rude, insulting, unwarranted and rather ludicrous holier-than-thou original post.

If anyone cares to review the entire thread, it's rather humorous to chart the twists and turns Jay has taken to avoid answering for himself, especially taking into account the original purpose of Jared's first post.

I doubt that Jay would accept such poor argument development (and run-on logic) in a paper by any of his students.

jay_wilkinson's picture

david, get over it. this thread has turned into something else. it happens.

i don't think you've been reading. i've spoken to the logo / trademark issue. i'll post it again...

1) it's a low brow term. that does not mean that logotype solutions themselves are low brow.
2) just because the dictionary has adopted the incorrect term and defined it does not mean it's correct. many notable identity designers would agree.
3) paul rand was producing work when the abbreviations "logo" was coming to power as a word. this does not make it a correct term either.
4) i do agree that it has become a common term though and that is the reality of it. i don't chastise people over it only people that should know better. my effort was to expose the reality of the term. i think you guys are way to entrenched in an improper blanket term.

open your eyes david.

>If anyone cares to review the entire thread, it's rather humorous to chart the twists and turns Jay has taken to avoid answering for himself, especially taking into account the original purpose of Jared's first post.

c'mon david you have to be more on the ball than this. i've been very diligent in answering all attacks on my posts. i believe very strongly in doing so. obviously more so then most other individuals on this thread. look at the sheer number of posts i have here... try again.

steve_p's picture

Jay you are so far out of your depth I really shouldn't bother, but here goes...

You tell Tiffany that 'arrogance is unfounded and naive condescension'

A few posts later you decide to paste in some comments about a book by William Henry, dealing with elitism.
Not any of the major players on the elitism scene - Mosca, Pareto, Michels etc, but William Henry for f*cks sake!
He may have won awards for his writing, but prose and social analysis are two different things. In terms of his views on the state of contemporary society, Henry was a just a tired old hack with no more authority than the guy in the pub.

Much more accomplished theorists than Henry have defended elitism, and much more accomplished theorists heve denounced it. Surely from your own elitist position, you would have to rate the opinions of these trained and talented professionals above the rantings of an ill-informed amateur hack.
(Although, you hold your own opinion on the definition of common words as a higher authority than any dictionary, so maybe I should expect you to value Henry's views above anyone else's).



To post these reviews of Henry's book is condescending because you ought to assume that the people reading the post are capable of finding out for themselves what elitism is, without having to be told by you.

To post these reviews is naive, because it demonstrates that your understanding of political and social issues is based not on an informed appreciation of relevant debates but on the populist rantings of hacks.

Your naive condescension is unfounded because your post makes it clear that the level of your social and political awareness is several steps below that of many of the contributors to this board, particularly those people who you have aimed your comments at.

Hmm...unfounded and naive condescension...what does that add up to?

hrant's picture

> why'd you read this thread

I don't know about H

plainclothes's picture

"i've been very diligent in answering all attacks on my
posts. i believe very strongly in doing so. obviously
more so then most other individuals on this thread.
look at the sheer number of posts i have here... try
again."

he's obviously not getting it, folks; can we move on
now?

"more so then most"

Jay, it's *than*. for some reason that particular
recurring error has been driving me nuts!

aluminum's picture

Jay...where did you get your dictionary?

You are obviously using one that is completely foreign to anyone else in here.

I just realized that this entire thread is a debate about a few words that you define in a completely different manner than the rest of the populace.

Knowing that, I now realize the debate is no longer fun and lacking any merit in terms of actually anyone coming to a conclusion.

'Doh! I'm so gullible.

jay_wilkinson's picture

well, it's been a good debate. i have to sit back and laugh. the fact is that the group of you are as elitist and arrogant a bunch of a$$holes as i have ever seen. i respect that. i think it's pretty apparent that you hold elitist ideals as well. if you didn't you wouldn't be pursuing a craft like typography or design. my hat goes off to you for that. for awhile i was afraid you guys were all a bunch of egalitarian zombies but i'm glad to see elitism is still going strong.

aluminum's picture

"if you didn't you wouldn't be pursuing a craft like typography or design."

Again, I'm really confused as to how you define 'elitist'.

PYMadlon's picture

I would like to be the first to wish this thread a very happy one year anniversary!

(...and I'd like to surreptitiously keep it open to see what kind of heck it will unleash in its second year!)

cph's picture

david, get over it. this thread has turned into something else. it happens.

BUT THIS THREAD CAN'T TURN INTO SOMETHING ELSE!

Hell, if things could evolve, some words might start out having one meaning, and then TURN INTO SOMETHING ELSE, and we all know that doesn't happen.

david_roughs's picture

Hey.

Wotta coinky-dink! I was directed to this site by a friend in Seattle who's currently also working towards being a graphic designer. We were comparing schools and after hearing gush about her typography class (which apparently was taught by Jay Wilkinson, it was the exact same exercises and the same principles), I was jealous as hell. My typography lessons were a couple weeks doing a letterform and a glossary sheet defining "serif" and "x-height" in an intro to graphic design class.

So I may not know a heckuva lot about type (but am taking recommendations for New Orleans area classes/schools), but I do know about umlauts. Well, rock 'n' roll umlauts anyway. Where in any other media an umlaut is a symbol denoting pronunciation (or at least that it is a foreign-@ss word yer looking at), in R 'n' R it simply means that the umlauted band is making claims to RAWK! No pronunciation changes need apply.

David Roughs

aeolist's picture

is this where is should post my new pancake recipe?

mrkgnao's picture

I hope you're making those pancakes from scratch...

handwriting's picture

http://www.mymindwriting.com

Handwriting is mind writing, expert personality development analysis, improving professional Trades of handwriting,
http://www.mymindwriting.com
oral lesson help plan, Study worksheets, Make money without tears, Learn tips for mind, Change practice for kid, Serious child grow, Global paper seminars, recognition with anonymous writing, improve skill therapy specialist.

http://www.mymindwriting.com

e_b_c's picture

while everyone else was busy yappin away, i was busy crafing the worl'ds most full-bruta lographiconidentradembellismentocommunicatesomething, EVER!!!!!!!!! (yes, MANY exclamation marks)

I RULE!

Joe Pemberton's picture

Dude, you can't go wrong with this:

tenaciousd.com

Joe Pemberton's picture

Rock on.

How about all lowercase?

Is it me or is 'gutterball' better suited to a
ska band. =) (Or any band that doesn't take
itself too seriously.)

anonymous's picture

> Having thought long and hard on this, I really think the umlaut should go over the u.

Wouldn't that make it sound kind of like "Gooterball" or "Gyooterball?" My umlaut skills are weak, but it seems that over the a they are less intrusive to the pronunciation.

* golly! I had to scroll past so much SHlT to get to the form.

anonymous's picture

after all jay's bantering we still have yet to see
any samples of his so called 'trademarks'.

so if you are so willing, mr. wilkinson, post
away--maybe we can all learn from your
masterful works.

anonymous's picture

Some would say "touch

anonymous's picture

Hello, this is my first post and I'd like to say hello to everyone. Also I'd like to encourage people back to the original topic, without so many words and more images. There's a Swedish band named Opeth and I kind of like their logo. May this serve as eye candy to go back to the Gutterb

vortex's picture

ratt`s Typography does exist? the font, any one?

blank's picture

ratt‘s Typography does exist? the font, any one?

Ratt’s logo is definitely custom drawn, although if you trawl the free font web sites you might be able to find something based on it.

Syndicate content Syndicate content