Talk:Acoustic branding

Vfd

On April 7, 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Acoustic branding for a record of the discussion. —Korath (Talk) 04:25, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

It may have been kept, but the page in its current state is still bloody awful. 24.240.34.82 01:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acoustic branding - redirect

Dear all,

we were not involved in a vote in 2005 and do not accept the merging of Sound Branding into Acoustic Branding. We are a serious company that create sounds for brands. The term "Sound Branding" is used by major Sound Branding companies including Sonar Brand And Music, Meta Design and us, GROVES Sound Branding.

Our founder, John Groves, is widely accepted as an International pioneer of Sound Branding and his thoughts on the terminology are available under:

Sound Branding - a definition by John Groves.

It is our belief that a common terminology will eventually evolve and that in the meantime all terms - including Sonic Branding and Audio Branding - should be given an equal chance. Making Acoustic Branding a key term in Wikepedia would be tantamount to Knowledge Branding by favouring a terminology that may give a particular company a competitive edge, which is not the philosophy of Wikepedia.

I would be very grateful if you would take this into consideration and allow the knowledge on the Sound of a Brand be communicated as such. --Groves Hamburg 11:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear all,

before you make any changes again, please consider these facts from Google:

Hits: "sonic branding - 23.100", "sound branding - 10.500", "audio branding - 30.500" "acoustic branding - 2.300"

Google UK - Search November 2006

Nevertheless, the term „Sound“ works best in all connotations and is thus semantically most suitable as the umbrella term for everything hearable. “Audio” is also good, although it rules out anything mechanical – and is nowhere near as flexible as “sound”. “Sonic” is largely associated with the speed of sound, and the hearing of bats. Curiously enough, the term „Sonic Branding“ was „hip“ in the UK during the late 90´s but has since lost ground.--Groves Hamburg 14:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ordinary Editors?

An unknown user writes there is an edit war between ordinary editors and Groves Hamburg? Well one of your "ordinary editors" might just be working for a branding agency - and the other bloke is probably his leader. Please...

So, to stay real, here´s how I see it:

Sound: The generic term for everything hearable - be it music, sound effects, ambient noise or the human voice. Although it is all encompassing, it suggests the source and the event itself, as opposed to the listening or hearing perspective.

Audio: The electronic reproduction of sound, especialy recorded.

Acoustic: The physical properties of a sound. Properties of a room , a space or an instrument. Can mean with out the aid of amplification

Sonic: The waves themselves - the qualities of sound referring its frequencies. e.g. bats, Concord as supersonic and medical Ultra-sonic machines.

Auditory / Auditive: Hearable as a connotation from “Listening”. The structure of sound from the recipient perspective

This is what we read - and it makes sense: "SOUND" is the word you're looking for! Cheers--Ylon707 18:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]