Update July 8, 2008: Roberto Landazuri, Corporate Archivist for Dolby was kind enough to contact us and provide some corrections and further insights into the background information we received about this logo from Turner Duckworth. Landazuri noted that the original logo was created in 1967 or 1968 by the graphic design partner of a two-man advertising shop in Surrey. The designer is quoted as saying "[Dr. Dolby] explained in simple terms that sounds were directed down a funnel and emerged from an inverted funnel as a cleaner, clearer sound. It was then that the initial idea of the Double 'D' came to me, thus making two double funnels. I returned to my studio and finally submitted three designs on my original idea. He immediately chose my first idea, saying 'That says it all.'" According to Ray Dolby, this is the specific conceptual underpinning for the original logo: the complementary nature of the Dolby noise reduction process. We were also informed by Landazuri that Ray mentioned that there is, coincidentally, a secondary significance to the double Ds: The two Dolby brothers, Ray and Dale, who cofounded the company in 1965.
Having grown up around media that included the presence of the Dolby logo — as I'm sure many of us have — I now recall that my impression of the double-d logo lead me to believe they had something to do with general tape and reel-to-reel technology, given the cassette-like look of the logo. My impression was likely not rooted in corporate intention as the original logo was designed by the founder, Ray Dolby, and had no specific conceptual underpinning. Either way the double-d has become a rather ubiquitous fixture in modern media environments, having successfully made the recent transition into the digital world. While we continue to see the presence of "Dolby Digital" in and around the movies, their brand presence with the stroked rectangle around "DOLBY" and uncomfortably justified "DIGITAL" has seemed a bit stale for a company that is trying to continue to define high-quality and audio surround sound. Enter Turner Duckworth, with their experienced touch and attention to brand and collateral details we have a refined update to the logo and respective visual identity system that retains the brand equity Dolby has established.
In a galaxy far, far away this is how the logo looked in its application.
The double-ds have been merged together, removing the visual separation and additional noise that was present in a logo that has to appear at extremely small sizes. This merger allows more lateral space for the Ds to have a wider form that marries well with the new typography. In addition, the "DOLBY" wordmark has been liberated from its bounding rectangle, employing a lighter-weight typeface for better legibility. The letterforms are boxier, with more squared-off and larger open counters, which lends itself to a more current "tech" feeling (whether the face is as timeless as the previous typography remains to be seen… 50 years is a good run, and what's "techy" today is easily dated tomorrow!). The only detail of "DOLBY" that rubs me noisily is the separation of the "B" crossbar which, while certainly quirky and ownable, becomes more of a distraction overall and hurts the otherwise supreme legibility Turner Duckworth has crafted at small sizes.
The other consideration for this logo is its extended family of lock-ups comprised of stacked product and service divisions. It is certainly a tough challenge to set up a system for these names and descriptors which often find themselves in the company of others, and while the typeface reads well at these small sizes, the structural rule/s in place seem more of a visual crutch than a visual element that is helping the overall hierarchy or brand. Overall, while there may be some details that don't seem quite ironed out yet, I think this rebranding shows impressive restraint and intelligent handling of the existing brand equity.
If you are curious, a closer look at the typography.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Armin’s comment is:
I really like this work a lot. It's always great to see a logo evolved appropriately. There is definitely a lot of equity in the double-d icon, and it's almost as if a movie-going experience isn't complete without the theater showcasing the Dolby audio logo somewhere in between the trailers and those creepy animations of dancing popcorn.
I also like that TurnerDuckworth was able to inject a new design element of their own with the typography. Unlike Christian, my favorite part is the truncated B, it feels unique and like a tailor-made solution just for Dolby.
The brand extensions are also spot on. But anything that got rid of the 500-point-tracked "D I G I T A L" would get my vote!
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:08 PM
Harris’s comment is:
I don't like it. Dolby looks generic and 80's tech to me. Looking at Dolby Digital Virtual Speaker, I don't know how anyone could think that the new one is cleaner, more recognizable, or higher tech.
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:16 PM
arnoldp’s comment is:
Well, this logo is supposed to be invisible and functional, so It does the job. The lock ups look kinda unrefined.
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:28 PM
m_m’s comment is:
I like it.
Though, doesn't it seem that the 'Digital' bit is redundant at this point? Are they even doing anything that's not digital?
What does an analog virtual speaker look like?
Perhaps a discussion on meaningful product naming would have been good to go with this redesign.
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:35 PM
Chad K’s comment is:
I got really excited when I saw the title of this post in my RSS feed "Return of the Double-Ds". For a second I though Pamela Anderson had re-branded herself.
Anyway, to the point. I do not feel the groupings received the necessary attention. The separations almost seem like folder tabs.
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:38 PM
damon’s comment is:
dig it.
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:41 PM
damon’s comment is:
oh, no, wait, i don't like the tabbed subdivisions...
they're ass.
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:43 PM
lodenmuse’s comment is:
The old Dolby logo was a perfect embodiment of meaning. Even in black and white, it spoke like a metal plaque attached to your hifi, "I am high-tech audio." As kids, we didn't know what the hell it stood for, but when we pushed the Double D button, the hiss from our cassette player suddenly vanished. It was one of the first labels we learnt to associate with the refinement of the technological high life.
Well, the 70's are gone, and Dolby now looks like bank merger du jour, clumsily cut out of construction paper.
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:56 PM
Bart O'Dell’s comment is:
I personally like the redesign of the mark but prefer the classic typeface to this "new" one. It lacks clarity and classic lines the the new mark retains.
On Jun.16.2008 at 03:59 PM
Lee Boone’s comment is:
How about that unfinalized "Star Wars" logo?
artist 1: "But the logo's not finished yet, and I was going into toshi station to pick up some power converters!"
artist 2: "Ooh, that sounds fun! just throw in an upside-down 'M' and let's call it a day!"
artist 1: "Great idea! Let's go."
Darrin Crescenzi’s comment is:
Lol @ Lee…
I think the updates to the logo and wordmark were necessary and are very well-executed. Those rule lines, though, are really a shame.
On Jun.16.2008 at 04:52 PM
Brandon’s comment is:
I really really love it. Shows a ton of class and restraint. Pretty rare lately.
On Jun.16.2008 at 05:30 PM
Keith’s comment is:
I like the new Dolby logo and agree with Armin that the "B" is a nice, customized touch. However, the lockups are awful! Aside from the distracting rules, why would a designer make these lockups align to the right?
On Jun.16.2008 at 05:43 PM
T-Bone’s comment is:
awesome. clean and techy. electronics are all about the number of tech logos on there, (see a PS3 or a AV Receiver) so the tab/lockup things work for me, even if they feel a little undeveloped.
i always saw the double-d symbol as speakers — anyone else?
On Jun.16.2008 at 09:39 PM
Mark’s comment is:
Well done, I like it.
The typeface is more easy on the eyes.
The old logo always look dated to me, glad they refreshed it. :)
On Jun.16.2008 at 11:46 PM
Joel Peterson’s comment is:
I can't handle the lack of the separation. The design theorist in me tells me that it added more noise, but I didn't care. It's just one of those things against the grain that made the Dolby logo so great for the past few decades. You'll be missed, separation.
On Jun.16.2008 at 11:51 PM
dg3’s comment is:
Yet another example of a logo that should've been left alone.
On Jun.17.2008 at 05:19 AM
Darren Alawi’s comment is:
Seems almost pointless, I say almost because I think it is the next logical evolution and is quite good, excellent restraint, very rare these days.
Not a fan of the variants though, would of wanted something different.
On Jun.17.2008 at 05:38 AM
Daniel’s comment is:
It still looks terribly dated - it reminds me of the big black stereos of the eighties (with turntable and double cassette deck - wow!).
I agree with m_m that the "Digital" now seems a bit superfluous... unless of course they're planning a new method of audio reproduction. Maybe we'll see a "Dolby Pyschic" logo in a few years time...
On Jun.17.2008 at 06:23 AM
sanjay basavaraju’s comment is:
I think the line is disturbing the symbol. I did a rough job in Paint. How about this minor adjustment?
Howard S.’s comment is:
I feel like the old version was just stereo, and the new version is in dubly.
On Jun.17.2008 at 08:59 AM
Julie’s comment is:
Those lines in the lockups remind me more of old cassette labels than the older logo ever did. Looks a bit messy, to me.
Darrin Crescenzi’s comment is:
Paint! Yes!
On Jun.17.2008 at 11:31 AM
Jeff A.’s comment is:
I like the new typeface, but I'm not sure I like it "more" than the old. In addition, it seems there's a cohesiveness missing in the new lock-ups. Visual crutch indeed.
On Jun.17.2008 at 11:48 AM
ScottS’s comment is:
The merging of the two individual "D" boxes was the right thing to do, a nice evolution done with restraint and respect to the equity of the brand. Removing the stroked rectangle around "Dolby" was also a good move.
I'm a little bothered by the juxtaposition of the rounded double-Ds in the graphic and the squared off D in "Dolby". I understand the desire to go with a techy font, but my eye sort of expects the two shapes to be identical, or at least more similar. At small scale, this difference is hardly noticeable.
Not a big fan of the short crossbar in the B...it seems unnecessary and a bit distracting. My eye keeps going to it, studying it, exploring it. I wonder if that B is part of the actual font or if the original letterform was altered to make it look more hip? I just am not convinced it adds anything of value.
And why the move from black to blue? Though I like the shade of blue they used, for this application it seems too soft and recedes a bit...black/white gives the [former] logo greater impact, injecting it with raw power and amperage. It spoke forcefully and loudly while this new blue one seems more restrained, more like polite conversation at a convention.
Final thought on the stroked tabs--seems like there could have been a better solution. These would have worked great during the logo's earlier days. Visually the weight of the type in the subdivisions compete too much with the letters in the mark. Smaller or lighter weights might work better?
On Jun.17.2008 at 12:52 PM
dbrenton’s comment is:
I'm not sold on the tabs either. They aren't horrible. They're just, okay. The rest of the logo is very well executed. They took their original logo, which i found to be a big aggressive, and made it more designed and friendly...even comfortable and relaxing (i feel the blue has a lot to do with that).
On Jun.17.2008 at 01:26 PM
Andrew’s comment is:
Like the new font, but with the old mark.
Don't understand the stacking of text with the "tab-ish" lines on the new one. Feels broken.
On Jun.17.2008 at 01:40 PM
exigent’s comment is:
The mark looks great, but I really really hate the "B"... It grabs my eye everytime due to the horrible way it looks as though it might suck the Y into itself.
The tabs are, how do I put this in a constructive and intellectual way... CRAP.
On Jun.17.2008 at 02:58 PM
Frank’s comment is:
The wordmark, especially the capital "B" looks terrible.What's also awkward is the horizontal stem of "L" - it seems to be thinner than the vertical one.
On Jun.17.2008 at 03:21 PM
Adam’s comment is:
Nice logo evolution. Let's see some application?
On Jun.18.2008 at 07:50 AM
Glenn ’s comment is:
Dig it.
On Jun.18.2008 at 12:55 PM
SP’s comment is:
I like it. The only things I don't like are the "line" motif used in the logos for Dolby Digital, etc.
On Jun.18.2008 at 05:15 PM
Matheus’s comment is:
very nice re brand
tipical, clean, good
Mongoose’s comment is:
What bothers me isn't he B. it's the 'DO'. The skinnier roundtangles intersect oddly in my opinion.
Armin: You'll never convince me that the D I G I T A L isn't how it's supposed to be. It turns it into one brand- 'Dolby Digital' over 'Dolby' subtype 'Digital'.
On Jun.25.2008 at 01:53 AM
Davekos’s comment is:
i think they have to put some hirarchy into the design for the lock ups.
it would be very hi-tech to see it applied on various objects.
Franzjosephblumenstrauss’s comment is:
Hate the »B«, hate the subdivisions.
In my opinion, they should've kept the old one with modifications (join the double-D and kill the outline around »DOLBY«.
WORK’s comment is:
I like it even though the "B" makes me think of the old Bank of America logo with the hidden eagle 
Nick’s comment is:
good stuff coming out of turner duckworth... their brand work has become quiet brilliant...although I must admit that I might have done something different in the brand extensions some of those logos start to become too paragraph like...but overall, Great stuff
On Jul.08.2008 at 08:21 AM
Nathan’s comment is:
the dolby logo itself is better. its when they start listing things under it, that it becomes a cluttered mess. yes the 500 point kerned "digital" wasnt the best solution but it has been around for so long that its accepted. i would hope that the designers would step back and find a better solution for the subtitles/descriptions.
On Jul.08.2008 at 11:15 AM
koyo’s comment is:
Mmmm... I think I like the older one.
On Jul.08.2008 at 11:30 AM
christopher’s comment is:
My band recorded in doubly, I am not sure about this dolby thing… Ya know, doubly more powerful and all that?
To all the haters- dolby is timeless stuff that changed the way we listen. The logo is not the thing, repeat, the logo is not the thing. Dolby was a genius.
On Jul.09.2008 at 11:47 AM
Darrel’s comment is:
It's nice to see them not reinvent the wheel and preserve the cache that the logo has built up over the past several decades.
I'm with Lee...I want to know more about that 'alternate' star wars logo.
On Jul.10.2008 at 10:46 AM
Joseph Maguire’s comment is:
I think the mark is a sophisticated update and it feels more modern and sleek.
On Jul.10.2008 at 05:22 PM
Gavan’s comment is:
I really do like Turner Duckworth.
This new logotype reminds me of the old XEROX wordmark.
On Jul.13.2008 at 03:37 AM
kirk’s comment is:
@WORK you nailed it. I kept being drawn to that weird "B"
also the lines bug me.
On Jul.21.2008 at 04:51 PM
Steve Cluett’s comment is:
With such a memory-laden mark, the responsibility of the designer transcends the needs of the client. Turner Duckworth have successfully achieved the right balance between updating the logo and retaining the equity and nostalgia of the original.
Good work.
On Jul.22.2008 at 04:31 AM
Peter O'Toole’s comment is:
Yeah i really don't like the lock up of the secondary items at all. It looks like a bag of mess.
Although the new chosen typeface looks well, I still prefer the original typeface-it has a timeless quality and strength that i feel is somewhat removed from the new typeface. The new typeface however does give the company a more modern feel but as was pointed out, this is bound to date quicker.
On Aug.08.2008 at 12:27 PM
