Everything by this label looks like shit because they slap their logo and generic text over every god damn album. It pisses me off but at least it's easy to avoid.
OP, almost every album before 1970 did that
>>63834393
this label isn't from before then though, so there is no excuse, and it's not like there was an excuse back then either.
>>63834364
honestly this label epitomizes "almost good". it'd be cool to see a modern label do that uniform cover art thing well, especially if they had a very specific sound they went for. but SB just kinda looks like trash. their music is the same way, it's a whole bunch of stuff that sounds cool on paper but then the execution is just lacking in one way or another.
Sacred Bones is such a lame label in general.
>>63834364
For the digital files just remove it. stop being such a fucking autist. They have a style so why do you care so much? It's a way of getting the music and label know, ask yourself how many favourite albums do you know the label of? probably a small amount. This is just a iconic style they use so everyone knows who was backing the album
>>63834505
>sacrificing artistic integrity for brand recognition
ye its a good label tho don worry
/s
I really like the uniform album covers myself.
>>63834364
it's just their 'aesthetic.' If it bothers you so much stop listening to Tunmblr-core trash.
OP their style is baller af
They are actually one of my favorite labels and I really like the cover art. Maybe you're just not the target audience so nevermind you will find things you like at other places, goodspeed!
>>63834505
labels with good music don't need to brand so aggressively cause people know them anyway. Take Warp for instance
OP is trippin. Text on the front produces some of my favorite covers of all time.
you dumb fucks, sacred bones covers are fucking god tier
OP wtf
>>63836631
This is the best album sacred bones put out, and guess what? no shitty logo and text on the cover. Coincidence?
>>63836892
correction, tiny logo in corner, but the point still remains.
>>63836892
>>63835178
COVER RANK
T>HOB>>>>EOS>>>>>>>KL>>>>>>>>>BBTM
which is funny cause thats the same as content,Except EOS is equel to HOB
I'm pretty sure the label only makes the artist do that for one release then they're free to design the cover without it. Most bands just stick with it though.
