Carnegie Hall unveiled a new logo and branding content and at a time when most groups seem to be looking forward, they did an about face to settle with a copy and paste of existing designs.
For the full logo, they kept it simple and went with a text-only version that uses the same font found in an original stained glass windows. While there’s claim that the new version added “bespoke features to make it unique,” I’m not entirely sure that’s the case.
And then there’s the logomark. On one hand, kudos to Carnegie for creating a dedicated logomark, that’s exactly what groups should do. But instead of using the same uniquely bespoke (bespokely unique?) font, they pulled from another internal resource: a steel beam with the Carnegie name in embossed lettering:
In context, that makes sense but I can’t imagine anyone having that context internalized. If nothing else, the whole thing is a very sweet nod toward sentimentalism. Whether or not this is the time to embrace that direction, is a different discussion.