#45

If companies are marketing laptops as MacBook clones, and purposefully copying the design, then does that not show how widely recognized (and desired) their products have become (same goes for Fender)?

I would say unfortunately Apple and Fender have a ‘win-win’ scenario where even competitors products have been deliberately designed to be mistaken for their own.

Surely a better approach than covering logos, buying covers etc. for a brand you don’t want to be identified with would be to just not buy or use that brands products? Then at least your conscience is clear that you haven’t further filled their coffers or facilitated their promotion.

1 Like
#46

I covered my Apple logo with a rainbow sticker. A reminder of a simpler time.

3 Likes
#47

There are differences between “don’t want to support”, “don’t want to be identified with,” and “don’t want to provide free advertising for in the context of a performance.”

I have never given Apple any of my money, but I also don’t want a big Microsoft logo on the back of my laptop either. (Nor Alienware, AMD, etc.). Particularly if I were performing live, and the whole audience was staring at the back of the laptop for the whole show.

5 Likes
#48

It’s not a matter of “not being identified with” it, for me. I hate branding. I hate the aesthetics of conspicuous advertising or promotion being visible when I perform. Or walk. Or anything.
i loved my sy77 and greatly appreciated that yamaha supported fm synthesis for years but I still taped over the YAMAHA name because it was distracting and added something unwanted to my performance.
I don’t cover the apple logo because of my feelings one way or another about apple. It’s because I don’t want it there.

6 Likes
#49

Just feels kinda weird. Yea it’s a product, but are you not performing for paying people? Like Yamaha is really proud of the instrument they made, they want their name on it is all. It definitely plays into marketing, but everything plays into marketing in our system lol.

#50

I don’t really get the connection to playing for paying people. Could you elaborate? I dont want to jump to conclusions.

It’s cool for yamaha or whoever to be proud of their product. But to me, once the product has been purchased, there is no obligation on the part of the purchaser to then go about advertising the product. And the reasons for covering a logo are so varied that who knows why any given person has covered it up.

I def cover up logos. But I also prefer to cover up the covering up lest the cover up inadvertently draws even more attention to the branding by its conspicuous absence. I’ll allow it might be a bit neurotic lol

8 Likes
#51

@lijnenspel

Not aware of that controversy concerning synthrotek. Why cover the logo as opposed to just removing the modules (sell, or recycle)if a company can’t behave according to accepted norms?

Also for folks who don’t like seeing ads I have a question.

When we post our music link on social media, is that an ad or a share?

I sell two products that I produce. One is food (honey) and one is the homes that I build. Many people in a long chain of hard work, supply and raw material production contribute to this effort.

I have a certain pride that I use my skills to provide both food and shelter, ie basic needs, for members of my community. In addition my work, as well of the work of other community members such as excavators and well drillers ultimately contribute to the tax base which further benefits the community with funds for schools, roads, etc.

Without advertising, how would anyone know these products are available?

Why is it so popular to demonize advertisers? That industry employees artists including musicians.

1 Like
#52

its been cool to read all these thoughts so far on logos…

for me, i was struck by a couple of things when i was thinking about all of this the other night, the first being that in one way the covering of the logo actually just serves to highlight what is under the covering. and for me for some reason its especially conspicuous when the covering method is “sloppy” or appears to be an afterthought… i don’t know why exactly, maybe because the thing they are covering has been so designed and is so intentional… that you have to fight fire with fire perhaps?

it also reminded me when people write f*ck instead of just writing fuck. its like the word intentionally gets even more attention even though the person writing the word like that is trying to be less offensive (??) somehow? i totally get the ambient light leak issue on mac laptops. but i did a quick google search and apple hasn’t had a light up logo for a few years now on their new laptops. i would guess that a fair number of people taping their laptop lids are doing so to obscure the logo itself and not for any distracting lighting reason.

its an issue i am thinking about a lot now because i am working on a new production for 2020. i have one piece of gear i want to use in the show but it has branding written across its face that is literally burned into the product. i inquired about getting a “clean” version and they said its not possible since its so well incorporated into the production process. as a visual artist i feel its my job to care about every single detail in the visual experience of the performance. not sure what i’m going to do about this piece of gear- either not use it or try and find some very creative solution to hide it.

sorry, lots of random thoughts here, but the hasty taping of the apple on laptops is totally understandable when a musician has spent all of their bandwidth crafting the auditory experience in a live performance. i get it that we can’t all control and micro-manage every single detail in a performance, no one has the time, energy, resources, or interest for that. its just that there is an intention there, a gesture towards the visual aspect of how an audience will have a total experience. and that the gesture is perhaps not as elegant as the other aspects of the work, i was trying to think if there was some sort of common communal reaction since everyone seems to deal with this at the gigs i go see.

and obviously being a visual artist i have way over-thought this subject in the past days. though i am really inspired by the variety of answers here, it makes me feel good to just jump in and find a randomly creative solution for hiding logos when needed. its certainly a good excuse to carry a small house plant with me!

as a final stream of consciousness, the casual taping of the laptop lid also reminded me of classical musicians in an orchestra when they are not playing. i’ve had the luck to tour with a couple of orchestras again this year and from the outside its a very different culture. one thing that sticks out most to me is how the musicians physically carry themselves when not playing- one moment they have the best posture and are playing the most incredible music, and in the next moment when its not their turn, they sit slumped in their chair as if they were invisible because they weren’t playing at that exact moment. i’m certainly not getting down on anyone for doing their thing, it just really struck me as an outside observer of how clearly the internal culture values the music above all else, including visually distracting elements of the non-playing members looking around the stage, or looking dreadfully bored, or slumping in direct opposition to the cultivated airs of their dress and the concert hall. i guess for me logos are kind of like this- a form of visual noise which i generally try to curb as much as possible. maybe that’s why i really love norns, grids, and arcs for shows since there is no branding on them at all, not even in terms of functions!

7 Likes
#53

Simply that you are promoting yourself as a product as well. To look down on a company for doing the same seems a bit silly to me is all.

Now to simply cover it for aesthetic reasons? Sure, but to claim the moral high ground or something seems pretentious.

I may be reading into the reasoning too much, so I don’t mean to imply that anyone who thinks that branding is too pervasive is pretentious. Sorry if I came off rude at all.

1 Like
#54

Because I get to tell people why I’ve masked it and make people more aware that way. :wink: I’m making use of the Streisand effect, see above.

4 Likes
#55

my Juno-6 came like this and I don’t intend on doing anything about it, adds character :stuck_out_tongue:

0607191234_HDR
0607191234_HDR.jpg4032×3024 4.04 MB

10 Likes
#56

I personally used a whole wad of fabulous sparkly rainbow-colored star stickers to cover the Synthrotek logo on my power module.

That cost me pennies, compared to choosing a new power module, buying it, and then selling the one I already had… which I don’t think would have been a more effective statement anyway.

(I did eventually sell it, when I got a new case anyhow.)

The (slightly) more effective (and more personally satsifying) thing I did was choosing not to do any more business with Synthrotek.

5 Likes
#57

Well the Streisand Effect worked on me as I had to do some research into that Synthrotek controversy. Covering the logo worked. :grinning:

Don’t think I’m going to rag on the Synthrotek guy though because we can’t always understand our own ignorance.

Most often we are innocent victims of circumstance and coincidence when it comes to our belief systems.

That search also yielded this interesting topic which I will have to read in its entirety when I get a chance.

2 Likes
#58

Certainly, this is a complex topic and not easily resolved one way or another. There’s lots of compromises, contradictions, interpretations and personal perceptions involved. For some, and that includes me, this is a topic touching the political realm (including its social ramifications), for others it’s just a plain old nuisance. Or anything in between.
Unfortunately, we are living in times of hyper capitalism unleashed at each and everyone and that’s nothing we can change right here and there. However, trying to choose to not get entangled in this crude system of exploitation is sometimes an option. Other times it is not.
I, for instance, only very rarely would wear any clothing which sports any visible branding of any sorts.
And with branding I mean the intention of the manufacturer to be visible for commercial gain. But being purist about this would, obviously, mean to chop of one’s nose despite the face…

In regards of clothing all of this might be quite easy, except for shoes really. I do, however, realise that this cannot necessarily be said so easily about computers or (modular) synthesized, for that matter. So what’s the options then?

One of them would be to choose to not display any branding as open as intended by the manufacturer (and this is what this thread seems to be about). In a world where we are continuously exposed to any possible, no matter how sublime, attempt to create desire, I think this is a legit way of expressing ones discomfort in assumed and enforced collaboration by the manufacturers.

Whilst I am not really intending to cover any brand names on individual modules, I would never ever pay a manufacturer for having a massive logo printed on their case. In fact, and this is the main point I am trying to make here, I would expect the manufacturer to reimburse me for my service of publicly (or privately) showcasing their product. Because, in times of relentless capitalism, I would want to argue, I could potentially also have an interest in only providing a service (advertising in this case) in return for financial gain. Just like a manufacturer of a computer or musical instrument expects me to pay a fair price for their service or product as well.

To make a long story short, intrusive showcasing of branding for financial gain is, by it’s very nature, exploitative. No matter how big or small your business is. And neither how socially acceptable it seems. How to address this fact on a personal level is a different topic altogether tho…

5 Likes
#59

It feels to me like we are talking about two different things. Or rather that branding is different things.

One thing is to buy a new sweater not because you need clothing but because you want to have the sweater with that brand name on it in the belief that owning it will make you feel better or newer or give others an impression of you which in turn will make you feel those things. (Wether or not wearing a certain brand actually does make some people feel better or more confident, not to mention how great or small or layered the mechanisms are that would make this possible is another discussion.) The perverse fact of branding of this kind is that the more you have a feeling of something missing or not being quite good enough in yourself or in your life, the more money there is to be made by selling you things that take on the appearance of being ‘practical’ (clothes, equipment, transportation) but whose actual function is to be more like a magical elixir, endowing you with a special halo (and thus legitimizing the hefty price tag). Another thing is when I own a pair of pretty good scissors. (I actually do own a pair of pretty good scissors.) I’m not going to cover up the brand name on them because the brand name seems entirely inconsequential. At the same time of course, it isn’t. The fact that that brand produces a good pair of scissors is exemplified by the pair of scissors they have produced. The brand name on a sweatshirt that is otherwise more or less identical to hundreds of other brands’ sweatshirts is the opposite – it’s the whole point.

And I suppose taping over the apple logo on your performing laptop depends on your view of where apple is on the kind of scissors vs. sweatshirt scale. Perhaps. Or also it may be (as several people seem to be saying) a way of expressing your disenchantment with the general status that sweatshirty brand culture (and the necessary mindlessness and/or insecurity and/or idea of ‘status’ that has to go with it, as well as, by extension, the culture and politics that enable it) has in our daily life.

(I hope I haven’t written a “yes thank you for pointing that out” type post. I suppose I’m saying more or less what @mode.analogue says just above. I’m imposing myself on the thread in order to be seen and to be confirmed by others. I’m writing so that I can feel better about myself by knowing I existed in the minds of fellow forum members for the few seconds it took them to read this, instead of buying a sweatshirt I really can’t afford.)

7 Likes
#60

They don’t offer them anymore, but I got a laptop skin from Society6 by the artist Beth Hoeckel and it completely changed how I feel about my macbook pro.

image
810EEB16-74AD-4BA9-9B99-3AD453CBC0A3.jpeg4032×3024 2.87 MB

I have a phone case of hers on my iphone too and it has a similar effect. I would highly recommend spending the $35ish to get a custom skin for your laptop, there’s a ton of sites where you can upload an image.

I resent that I’m kind of stuck with apple products at this point, I’m dependent on them for work and switching would be a major burden. it’s not like any of these tech companies are looking out for anything other than their own bottom line anyway.

but lord, they are a crappy company and I don’t want to look at their dumb logo all the time.

7 Likes
#61

It looks to me like some people in this thread are putting a lot into it.
Not all of us do. It is just something that feels nice. Which is how I feel about music
most of the time as well. Sure I have a lot of (wannabe) big existential thoughts around music and why I make it, but that is not what I think about every day. Then I do it because it feel good and a good way to spend my time.

When I cover up some logos and distracting text it just feels good.
Sure I have a lot of thoughts around consumerism, capitalism and overusing, and even some thoughts around my own flaws, gas, and trying to focus on the right things and not be distracted.

But in the end I just do it because it makes me feel good. It makes playing my setup just a tiny little bit better and by that inspirational :slight_smile:

8 Likes
#62

yooooo that’s nice!!!

#63

I guess I have a few more thoughts to share given the evolution of this conversation…

Totally love this post. Thank you for sharing. Advertising itself is not the problem IMO. We need ads – we need to know when things are available to help us meet our needs. I have been noticing recently how often an ad has helped me to find a useful product when my social connections have not been sufficient. And I think advertising your products and services, as long as it’s done ethically, is not only necessary but admirable.

My response to that question is that the kind of advertising that leads me to think I need something when I don’t need it just to sell a product, or advertising that promotes an unhealthy image of myself just so I will assume it is the solution to my newfound (and fabricated) problem like @kim said, is actually deeply upsetting and I am ethically opposed to it. I see this all over in food, fashion, banking… most major industries that deceive the public. It’s these advertisers that I personally demonize.

Banksy wrote something about advertising in 2004 that is somewhat relevant here – we didn’t ask for ads and billboards (and as the linked article points out, I didn’t ask for Banksy either). As a resident of New York City I have some say in whether or not the new super-bright LED TVs in the subway are upsetting, but the revenue they generate for the MTA far outweighs my opinion. I didn’t ask for them (or for a light-up logo on my computer, either).

I appreciate it when advertising space is reclaimed as a voice for someone else. I particularly remember a moment here in NYC when an artist got a list of all the illegal billboards and invited an artist to reclaim each one. The companies couldn’t do anything about it because their ad space was illegal, and the visual landscape of the city was more true to its occupants for a time. Perhaps covering a logo is an effort to reclaim that space (with varying degrees of effectiveness). (How this is executed is also an art – I’d personally rather see a new piece of art take the place of a billboard or logo than simply see someone spraypaint ugly lines on it…)

All that said, I’m not really that serious about it in this case (no pun intended), though I do think the ethics of advertising is a huge deal. It’s a grey area, and it’s important to think about intent and take action appropriately, and however we think we can be effective.

5 Likes
#64

If an unbranded aesthetic is important enough, one can choose to use a computer brand other than Apple. Many Thinkpads don’t have an illuminated logo on the top and ones that do have software to disable the LED. So if the aesthetic is a top priority, the compromise would be missing some software applications that won’t run on Linux or Windows. I think this is fine.

Regarding advertising, the latest Chapo Trap House podcast is an interview with Alan Moore. Stick it out for the part where he describes advertising as magick (yes, with a k). It is a great conversation.

2 Likes