Thread: Latest Pentatone release's artwork design really sucks!

Posts: 26
Page: 1 2 3 next

Post by Allen October 12, 2014 (1 of 26)
Is this the new new thing? When LSO does similar naive artwork design, I do not feel like I want to buy their release, but at the very least, I can still tell the LSO logo.

I hate to be so negative, but just see the latest batch of pentatone artwork design, and feel like it is very bad. Where is the logo, or any recognizable design pattern?

I guess I am too used to those old school artwork, where I can recognize the vendor at a glance.

Post by samayoeruorandajin October 12, 2014 (2 of 26)
I guess, but in the end all I care about is the music.

Post by rammiepie October 12, 2014 (3 of 26)
samayoeruorandajin said:

I guess, but in the end all I care about is the music.

+1

And I've seen much, much worse artwork on SACD releases than Pentatone's and I always hated their older RQR release graphics but as sam says: it's the music that counts.

Just be thankful that Pentatone has seen fit to release these buried in the vault QUAD treasures as Universal probably wouldn't!

And they're NOT charging MoFi or AP reissue prices so, again, be thankful for that.

And Allen, you never heard the expression: "Say It With Flowers?"

Post by Claude October 13, 2014 (4 of 26)
First time I see the covers, and I agree, the artwork is clueless.

http://www.pentatonemusic.com/series/4

The flower theme is overly generic, and the artist names (why only them and not the composers?) are rather difficult to read.

The only non-human life form on covers that will make you sell more discs is this:

https://twitter.com/harmoniamundi/status/520727112987058176

Post by rammiepie October 13, 2014 (5 of 26)
Perhaps then, Pentatone should release them in SHM~SACD presentation boxes on single layered stereo SACDs and charge $40 each.

Will that make them more saleable?

Post by Claude October 13, 2014 (6 of 26)
Better looking covers are not expensive.

This type of cover design is often used by big labels for their budget reissue series, so they don't compete with the full price releases by the same company.

But the Pentatone SACDs are state of the art reissues, which deserve a more attractive cover art. Not necessarily the original LP cover, which may require additional licensing costs.

Post by sunnydaler October 13, 2014 (7 of 26)
CHRIS
TOPH
ESCHEN
BACH

Chris Toph Eschen plays Bach. Ha ha ha.

Post by fredblue October 13, 2014 (8 of 26)
rammiepie said:

+1

And I've seen much, much worse artwork on SACD releases than Pentatone's and I always hated their older RQR release graphics but as sam says: it's the music that counts.

Just be thankful that Pentatone has seen fit to release these buried in the vault QUAD treasures as Universal probably wouldn't!

And they're NOT charging MoFi or AP reissue prices so, again, be thankful for that.

And Allen, you never heard the expression: "Say It With Flowers?"

You might be in for a little surprise on the Quad front w/UMe, Ralph.. my lips are sealed! ;-)

Post by operamuso October 14, 2014 (9 of 26)
Surely Pentatone's artwork has always sucked? If I had seen any of their RQR series sleeves in a shop without knowing anything about the company, I would have assumed that Pentatone was a cheap and tacky knock-off outfit, rather than a purveyor of some of the best-sounding SACDs around. But then didn't the Pentatone guys mainly graduate from Philips which was itself a company very often guilty of dreadfully unstylish artwork?

Post by Allen October 14, 2014 (10 of 26)
operamuso said:

Surely Pentatone's artwork has always sucked? If I had seen any of their RQR series sleeves in a shop without knowing anything about the company, I would have assumed that Pentatone was a cheap and tacky knock-off outfit, rather than a purveyor of some of the best-sounding SACDs around. But then didn't the Pentatone guys mainly graduate from Philips which was itself a company very often guilty of dreadfully unstylish artwork?

I am not a fan of older Pentatone's artwork design, either. But at the very least, the design is very recognizable, even from afar.

Sometimes when I go to store, I can quickly locate an item just because the design is distinguishable. For example, if I want to find Joshua Bells in early 90's, I may look for that red/blue ribbon (logo of Londo/Decca) in a pile of CDs.

The older Pentatone may have wasted too much real estate for 2 corners, but it is very recognizable so that I can tell it is a pentatone release right away.

But current design really gets to a new level of absurdity. Can you really recognize the work, the player, the composer from that cover art? Com'on, have they done homework for marketing? And what are they trying to sell? to be attractive? or even just to be comprehensive, as the cover should be at least clearer about the title and content?

I just do not get it. Seriously!

As to Philips, you just remind me of those dreadful design of their Complete Mozart release. I have tried my best to avoid CD purchase from that series entirely. ;) Philips' budget release (concert classics, for example) indeed looks cheap. The current Pentatone design has the same bad taste indeed.

Page: 1 2 3 next

Closed