It has been discussed in the sound branding scene. Now it’s finally here the new BMW Sound Logo. To make it short: I am personally very disappointed!
I am happy about every good Sound Branding case (see Audi). It helps to grow this topic, however; in this case it is a big step back.
The new TVC – they will be first launched in France & UK – can be seen here.
And here is the old Sound Logo (at the end).
From my perspective it is not a Sound Logo it is a sound effect. Can you recall it tomorrow morning after you wake up?
For me it sounds like a mystery thriller or a sound effect of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”. There is no fit to the aesthetics of BMW. Look at a print ad from BMW and listen to the new Sound Logo. Does it fit?
Sound Branding Blog 
I agree. It sounds like…nothing.
After being an advertising Creative Director for over 25 years, and also being a musician in parallel, I’ve just started a sonic branding company in India called ‘BrandMusiq’.
I think BMW has used the Intel sonic logo as a starting point and has ended up creating something that’s neither here nor there.
Hi Rajeev,
interesting that you mention the Intel Sound Logo. I have no clue what they had in mind. I can only imagine that the board of directors approved it after they had seen a 30-minute presentation on “how BMW should sound”….
Yeah, sometimes the presentation is better than the final output, ha ha
unbelievable. after using a quite good sound logo for years… they come out with this trash
Hi Alberto,
the problem with the old one was that hardly anyone did recognize it or could recall which brand it was. But compared to the new one the old Sound Logo is much more stylish and does better fit to BMW.
It would be interesting to see the process they used to arrive at this end – and particularly interesting to see what, if any, testing was involved. I’m still trying to get a sense of how this is congruent with the brand identity. There’s certainly little to no flexibility for adapting/evolving it and still maintaining its essence. You could argue that it’s distinct and potentially recognizable – but I think more because of the negative reaction to it. It’s questionable that a brand wants to be remembered as “the guys with the weird audio logo…”
I found it interesting that they still used two percussive hits in the new logo, but they felt so much less impactful than in the previous ad. The two strikes sounded very powerful and gave me the feeling that there was a high level of craftsmanship involved in the older ad.
I would like to have heard them do something that actually enhanced that feeling, rather than detract from it by using less impactful strikes and throwing some notes around them.
I’m coming late to this discussion, but find it interesting that all the comments have been about the “sound logo” and no-one has said anything about the fact that the whole music track of this spot seems to have been written without any regard for the fact that there would be a wall-to-wall voice over. The orchestration fights with the voice making it – for me – an unpleasant listening experience.
Hi Tony,
good point. I think the irritation about the Sound Logo is so “big” that we just focused on this little piece of music ;)
Thanks for your comment!
Karlheinz
I liked the old one. Especially the story behinbd the branding! The new one sounds interesting but not very chracteristic. And i’m wondering about the main issue behind the brand?
Hi Deffoo,
thx for your comment.
I agree the brand fit is not clear to me either ;)