Quote
georgie48
How come that Aldridge never mentioned publically about any "rip off"? He could have made a fortune if that would have been the case
And how about the person who first sliced an apple in half? How long ago is it, that the Beatles used that, far from original, half sliced boring image on their records? Was it celebrated?

Exactly this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-29 15:21 by MisterDDDD.

Quote
Irix

Quote
GasLightStreet

Perhaps I'm not looking at the correct issue of Brown Sugar, released April 16, 1971, but what I've seen doesn't have the original logo on it.

US: Tongue on the label - [www.45cat.com] , UK: Tongue on label and rear-cover - [www.45cat.com] , Germany: Tongue on label and front-cover - [www.45cat.com] .

The UK one doesn't look like the original ie UK LP record sleeve version.

The original logo and what Pasche faxed are not similar. Seems a bit odd that they're different considering the original, which can point to Braun just making it neater, which could say that Pasche is responsible for the "new" logo as well.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Irix

Quote
GasLightStreet

Perhaps I'm not looking at the correct issue of Brown Sugar, released April 16, 1971, but what I've seen doesn't have the original logo on it.

US: Tongue on the label - [www.45cat.com] , UK: Tongue on label and rear-cover - [www.45cat.com] , Germany: Tongue on label and front-cover - [www.45cat.com] .

The UK one doesn't look like the original ie UK LP record sleeve version.

It looks a lot like the rubber stamp/faxed version, in fact.

We know that the tongue (as we know it) was a direct result of the Aldridge version one way or another - according to georgie:

Quote
georgie48
Braun was forced (there was a lot of pressure on releasing Sticking Fingers as quick as possible, due to the then very popular "fashion" of bootlegging)
to create a suitable version, he remembered the Day Tripper image by Aldridge

And:

Quote
georgie48
If Aldridge's book would not have existed, for sure the "USA version" of the Stones logo would have looked differently.

Based on that, seems clear that the idea and/or embellishments of the tongue were lifted from Aldridge by someone at some point, and all the evidence points not only at Braun, but also at Pasche imo.

Quote
georgie48
How come that Aldridge never mentioned publically about any "rip off"? He could have made a fortune if that would have been the case

Well he never mentioned the Pasche OR the Braun version, so maybe he wasn't as "trigger happy" as some when it comes to copyrights, lawsuits, etc.
If he was, he certainly could have mentioned either Pashce or Braun at some point as both designs were clearly a direct result of his own design.

Quote
CaptainCorella

John Pasche was an art student at (then) Brighton College of Art (now part of Brighton University). A few years later my partner was a student at the same College, and through her I met many fellow students and later staff, including someone who went off to be a Head of School at the Royal College of Art. (Aside: Next time I talk to that latter I'll ask her if she knew Pasche).

To me it's UTTERLY and TOTALLY inconceivable that anyone of my generation and background who was interested in (any combination of) art, The Beatles, cultural revolution, did not read and avidly study Aldridge's books. (Mine actually fell to pieces, and is now held in a slip case I made when I did a course at.... Brighton College of Art).

A lawyer would say that it is beyond reasonable doubt that Pasche was influenced by Aldridge. Any argument about the origin of the logo that ignores this aspect has no value.

Indeed, yet some are in complete denial, and will continue to be.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
blivet

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Irix

Quote
GasLightStreet

Perhaps I'm not looking at the correct issue of Brown Sugar, released April 16, 1971, but what I've seen doesn't have the original logo on it.

US: Tongue on the label - [www.45cat.com] , UK: Tongue on label and rear-cover - [www.45cat.com] , Germany: Tongue on label and front-cover - [www.45cat.com] .

The UK one doesn't look like the original ie UK LP record sleeve version.

It looks a lot like the rubber stamp/faxed version, in fact.

It's all not that difficult, really. Chess was the only one who travelled between the UK and the USA at that time. "The Office" (read: Chess) wanted to make Rolling Stones Records letters representative, so in between some attempts were made to create a stamp, some input based on Pasche's work, some modifications by Braun, and here you are. Both gentlemen don't remember exactly what happened when during those very hectic Autumn 1970 days, but that certainly is not a capital crime
Mick often is credited for the logo (he asked Pasche to come up with something in connection with the goddess Kali), but Chess came up with the idea of making a logo without words (he found inspiration when passing a Shell gasoline station while in the Netherlands).
Also, a global policy for distribution of records wasn't common practice and even within Europe some records labels were produced "locally", hence those sometimes small, but visible differences. A quick b/w fax here, a quick b/w fax there, some phone calls and that was it, basically. Chess was the overall coördinator and had a very tough time under pressure of a quick and smooth release of Sticky Fingers. The making (and distribution) of the notorious Andy Warhol zipper sleeve, with its own creative problems, was all in the hands of Braun's company (hence that little USA version of the logo at the back).
All in all a small miracle that things worked out pretty well.
Personally I was thrilled and very proud (as a fan) when I bought the album in April 1971


I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town

Quote
georgie48

Mick often is credited for the logo (he asked Pasche to come up with something in connection with the goddess Kali), but Chess came up with the idea of making a logo without words (he found inspiration when passing a Shell gasoline station while in the Netherlands).

Both were ahead of their time no doubt in signing off on the nameless logo.
Shell was also waaay ahead of it's time on adapting a nameless logo, but when your name is the item pictured, makes it a bit easier



Shame Apple wasn't the Beatles actual band name as opposed to their record company's, the logo would then still be identifiable and profitable to them as opposed to Apple.
They made a big mistake in settling with Apple for a paltry amount in '81 ($80k) imo, they should have held out. Then again, like mentioned earlier, an Apple isn't exactly uncommon art (similar to mouths and lips), so good on 'em for getting anything I suppose.

Quote
GasLightStreet

The UK one doesn't look like the original ie UK LP record sleeve version.

Brown-Sugar-Single: released 16-Apr-1971, Sticky-Fingers-Album: released 23-Apr-1971. "Early stages" regarding the T&L-logo, John Pasche had not completed the logo-design in time for the release according to Craig Braun (hence the re-drawing in US) - [www.Amoeba.com] , [iorr.org] . As georgie48 above said, due to time pressure and because the logo was 'all new' (the graphics departments had no experience with it) different versions were used.

Quote
MisterDDDD

Both were ahead of their time no doubt in signing off on the nameless logo.

The first Shell-logo was trademarked in 1900. And this "nameless" logo below was trademarked in June 1909:


[Automuseum-Stuttgart.de]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-29 21:20 by Irix.

The Beatles could have used Aldridges tongue as their logo back in '69 before Pasche and Braun copied it - imagine that!
But instead they already had their own logo which was simply their name, and it's logo that's still recognized around the world helping to keep them the #1 most succesful and popular band of all time.
Simple and to the point, and unlike the origins of the Stones tongue, it was completely original:


Simple and humble beginnings, the interesting story on the evolution of the iconic Beatles logo here: The Beatles’ drop-T logo

"On the spot, Arbiter designed the famous drop-T logo, hastily sketched onto a scrap of paper.
The capital B and dropped T were to emphasise the word ‘beat’. Drum City was paid £5 for arranging the artwork,
which was painted onto the drum head by Eddie Stokes, a local sign writer".

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-29 21:25 by Hairball.

Lol.

It was their name.
It was accidental (the T wouldn't fit the drum) the real inspiration came from The Crickets.

Didn't intend to make anyone butthurt over the lads lack of business/marketing acumen, that's well documented. But their log.. err.. name, doesn't make anyones top logo/marketing lists that I could find.. Maybe I should search just their field, "band logos" brb....
Nope, not even in the top there.. middle of the pack at best, after Stones, Grateful Dead, Kiss, Ramones, et al.

Not tough for a fan of both like myself to admit that while the lads were first in many categories, not sure why so difficult to admit they were average at best in this one..
Odd, but I guess if the goal is dogging the Stones, it makes it easier. Alternate facts as it were



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-29 22:05 by MisterDDDD.

Quote
Irix

Quote
MisterDDDD

Both were ahead of their time no doubt in signing off on the nameless logo.

The first Shell-logo was trademarked in 1900. And this "nameless" logo below was trademarked in June 1909:


[Automuseum-Stuttgart.de]

Sure.. I'm guessing you took my comments to read that they didn't exist.
Was much later when many many companies recognized the marketing genius, as we know.

The Age of the Wordless Logo
“Consumers are jaded about advertising in a way they weren’t several decades ago.”

This shift is ostensibly in accordance with a more streamlined approach to design, as well as certain features of the modern economy: Symbols work better than long names on computer screens and apps, and they allow for greater flexibility if a company wants to dabble in multiple industries at once. For instance, names like Starbucks Coffee and MasterCard are tied to specific products in ways that symbols are not, which can be a disadvantage at a time when it’s perfectly plausible for a company that makes phones to make cars too. Additionally, visual cues can travel across borders more easily, because they eliminate the need for translation.

[www.theatlantic.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-29 22:19 by MisterDDDD.

Dont know if it still holds the postion
but a few years back Stones Tongue
was listed as second to McDonald's
Golden Arches as the most recognizable logo in the world .....



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
Dont know if it still holds the postion
but a few years back Stones Tongue
was listed as second to McDonald's
Golden Arches as the most recognizable logo in the world .....

Yup, remember it well.
Now, somewhat ironically as it relates to this discussion, Apple holds the top spot in most surveys followed by the Golden Arches, Starbucks etc.

The rest are mostly now tech companies, Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft, Spotify et al, which is not surprising as I mentioned earlier, many many companies adopted the practice much later.
Rolling Stones and Chess were way ahead of their time as we can clearly see now, perhaps not as far as Shell and Mercedes, but very far, especially for a band..

No question I love the Stones logo, and have many shirts, etc. with the iconic tongue, but it's the actual origins of the design that have always been questionable. Some have even mistakenly thought it was designed by Andy Warhol, but little did they know the origins can be traced directly back to the Beatles songbook. And while I've always loved the tongue logo, not sure if comparing it alongside brands such as Starbucks and McDonalds, etc. is really such a good thing. Being part of a bunch of massive corporate sellout logos isn't really a positive imo, and instead like to think the Stones are separate from that mass consumption machinery. The sad truth is though, I guess they really are a part of the machine at this late stage in their career - when you can find toilet paper w/the tongue logo, and people wearing a Stone shirt w/tongue that have no idea who the Rolling Stones are, the logo has now become a generic logo/fashion statement that has little to nothing to do with the band itself. All that said, not sure if the Stones would have even bothered with a logo if not for the success the Beatles had with their logo - both the iconic band name (as seen on Ringo's drums), and the successful Apple Company logo which also preceded the Stones tongue that originated from the Aldridge design.

Perhaps my favorite version of the tongue, which is on one of my favorite Stones t-shirts, from one of my favorite Stones shows - the Vredenburg/Van Gogh/Starry Night inspired design:



_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Yup.
Butthurt.

Quote
Irix

Quote
GasLightStreet

The UK one doesn't look like the original ie UK LP record sleeve version.

Brown-Sugar-Single: released 16-Apr-1971, Sticky-Fingers-Album: released 23-Apr-1971. "Early stages" regarding the T&L-logo, John Pasche had not completed the logo-design in time for the release according to Craig Braun (hence the re-drawing in US) - [www.Amoeba.com] , [iorr.org] . As georgie48 above said, due to time pressure and because the logo was 'all new' (the graphics departments had no experience with it) different versions were used.

I remember reading that, but it was kind of an "easy around the corner" remark from Craig Braun. There was no communication between him and Pasche whatsoever, even more so, they didn't know anything about eachother (!), Chess was the mediator. Much closer to the truth is that Pasche had completed his basic design, but the result had to be approved by the Stones themselves (in he présence of Marchall Chess) before he could, say, finish it off. In the mean time, October - November 1970, Braun already had to work under high pressure on the album sleeve, which had to have the logo included. The faxed image and verbal explanation by Chess "forced" Braun to come up with "his own interpretation" logo, hence the great team work with Velez (very good drawing qualities - the perfect, sharply drawn, balance between lips and tongue) and the colour layering qualities of DiMiceli (this is for Hairball's question). The result was the ultimate, eternally beautiful "USA" version!

I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town

Quote
Topi
Next thing you know, maybe Alan Partridge turns out to be the original designer!

Smartest posting and smartest poster in a while!

Genuine LOL stuff! Thanks

--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan

Thanks for the info. on Velez and Dimicelli georgie - seems the origins of the tongue is really a long and winding road.

So to try and summarize - there's Braun, Velez, and Dimicelli who all contributed/embellished the design from Pasche who for all intents and purposes was directly inspired by Aldridges design (IMO).
Quite a convoluted and complicated story, and a far cry from the simplistic humble origins of the Beatles original logo dating back to '63.

Here's Ringo with original drum set w/logo designed by Ivor Arbiter, and painted on by Eddie Stokes, a local sign writer:



And good old drum shop owner Ivor Arbiter who quickly designed the logo, and being paid just £5 - pictured here in 2005 who has since passed away (RIP).



_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-29 23:55 by Hairball.

ROCKMAN

Wow.
Never looked at it in that light.
I see it now so much clearer. Thanks!

And this isn't just to get you to finally stfu (it will literally never happen, always the last word.. watch) about how much cooler, and smarter, more successful, and brilliant the lads are( mean were of course) than the Stones, in every single facet, as you've gone on and on about all over these threads, at all.

I genuinely think The Beatles were way ahead and better than everyone now, including the Stones.
Thanks for all you do to convince Stones fans of that, goes unsaid a lot of times, but it's appreciated.


Also, serious question:
Do the Fab Four still have any kind of fan forum going?

Cause, like you do here, I think it might be fun to become a regular there and spew nothing but Stones are better nonsense. Looks like trolling like that would be a lot of fun!

Thanks again for setting us all straight.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-30 00:29 by MisterDDDD.

Lol...sounds like someones is seriously "butthurt"...

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Do the Fab Four still have any kind of fan forum going?

YEAH always wondered why Hairball wasnt on a Fab Four forum



ROCKMAN

Quote
Irix

Quote
GasLightStreet

The UK one doesn't look like the original ie UK LP record sleeve version.

Brown-Sugar-Single: released 16-Apr-1971, Sticky-Fingers-Album: released 23-Apr-1971. "Early stages" regarding the T&L-logo, John Pasche had not completed the logo-design in time for the release according to Craig Braun (hence the re-drawing in US) - [www.Amoeba.com] , [iorr.org] . As georgie48 above said, due to time pressure and because the logo was 'all new' (the graphics departments had no experience with it) different versions were used.

The stamp one looks like it was done hastily.

It took that long for him to do the final (original) logo for STICKY FINGERS after the stamp? Maybe he did more than one. Maybe he did a bunch.

Is there anyway we can screw
the story and have Dylan as the
one who first come up with the Stones tongue ....



ROCKMAN

Love the Beatles and Stones both almost equally, and to be fair I've seen the Stones many more times than the Beatles.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-30 00:36 by Hairball.

Quote
MisterDDDD

Do the Fab Four still have any kind of fan forum going?

Yes, e.g.: [www.BeatlesBible.com] .

Quote
Rockman

Is there anyway we can screw the story and have Dylan as the one who first come up with the Stones tongue ....

Yeah - the idea of the Stones tongue was blowin' in the wind ....

Quote
Hairball
No question I love the Stones logo, and have many shirts, etc. with the iconic tongue, but it's the actual origins of the design that have always been questionable. Some have even mistakenly thought it was designed by Andy Warhol, but little did they know the origins can be traced directly back to the Beatles songbook. And while I've always loved the tongue logo, not sure if comparing it alongside brands such as Starbucks and McDonalds, etc. is really such a good thing. Being part of a bunch of massive corporate sellout logos isn't really a positive imo, and instead like to think the Stones are separate from that mass consumption machinery.

It doesn't matter if it's a good or bad thing in comparing it alongside McDonald's, which took a while to become what it is, Starbucks etc, a lot that have happened after 1970. For one thing, it's the most recognizable band logo in the world, which has made it the most recognizable music brand in the world. There is no mistaking what it is when you see that logo - and that is The Rolling Stones.

Spanish Is the Loving Tongue ....

Maybe it was Picasso .. Goya or Dali who first sketched the tongue



ROCKMAN