Genesis, only two LP's have a similar 'font'.

Gentle Giant

Triumvirat

Pink Floyd

To name just a few.

^Exactly, probably easier to name the bands that DO.

ELP

Yes

Dream Theater

Not true for Genesis. 

Nursery Cryme and Foxtrot have a similar font, A trick of the tail and Wind and Wuthering have a similar font and TLLDOB and ATTWT both have a similar font. So three sets of two albums is more accurate.

Not sure about Triumvirat but I consider the dark side of the moon prism to be a logo for PF and so is the lettering for the Wall album. If not then I guess the RD logo for Yes doesn't count either.

For Gentle Giant the giant guy with the smiley face and beard is most definitely their logo.

For King Crimson I consider the discipline emblem to be a logo more or less.

Agree to disagree. 

Yes, of course.

But one of my favorites is glam-prog band ANGEL.  The logo looks the same turned upside down as well.  They are not on this site, but should be based on their first two albums.

If you Google 'logo' for both bands guess what comes up. Not that google is the end all be all.

An album cover image is not the same thing as a logo, so no The Stones mouth/tongue image is not a logo, nor the prism on PF's DSotM. Neither used it on any of their other original albums, as far as I remember.

And please, Google is a search engine: what you get are search results, that is far from being the same as "an answer to a question".

In general I think I prefer album covers without band logos. A logo signals 'product' or 'brand' to me, and there is clearly an element of commercial thinking behind it.

The moment there is a different font for each album, it leaves more focus on the album itself rather than the "brand" with which it is associated, and I clearly prefer that from an ideologic point of view.

These are interesting, but problematic examples. I don't think either could be considered a logo, strictly speaking. The GG-guy from their first album cover has become a recurrent item, not so much on their studio albums (once or twice?) but more on their live and compilation albums. So to me this more an emblematic image used for marketing purposes (as are the Rolling Stones tongue and PF's prism). But on their studio albums GG didn't really use a logo other than a similar lettering of their band name on some of them (that could be considered a logo, but they didn't use it continuously).

KC's Discipline emblem is another example of a strong album cover image being used in other marketing strategies: e.g. the DGMLive site. But here the emblem is part of the proper logo of the site: "DGM[discipline-emblem]Live" - they integrated the emblem within their logo, but the emblem in itself isn't a logo, imo.

An emblematic image, used for different purposes, is not the same thing as a logo, but sometimes can become a part of it...

After reading many of these posts I'd like to re-state my position (see, it is possible to have a point of view changed)

Many of the 'logos' that are being discussed here don't appear on 'every album', granted.

So maybe better to say 'the single image that most associates the band'.

This now satisfies many of the arguments/suggestions above.

For example... do you consider these to be 'LOGOS' of the band?

Cautious now...many of these have NOT appeared on every album or maybe even most of the albums but are mostly understood to be logos.

If there is a band logo I actually like, it will have to be this one. The band Tv-2 was formed in 1981 at a time when the national broadcaster DR still had monopoly on television. Right-wing politicians had been pushing forward for many years for a TV2 because they thought DR was too left-wing (The broadcaster TV2 didn't see the light of day until 1988).

I guess the band Tv-2 wanted to ironise on the debate (their lyrics are often very ironic). It works well because it really looks like a TV logo.

The tongue was on an album? If so I can't remember which one. Yes, I googled logos and for PF the prism came up. It's definitely a log in my opinion. I just didn't feel like arguing with him so I said "agree to disagree" otherwise the discussion would go around in circles for the next ten years. Anyway, I admit there can be a thin line be between a logo and a band's lettering but that's a different thing.

By the way, typically responses go under the quotes.  It makes it easier to find responses and thus easier to read. 

I understand your point, but for me this is just an image that has become very identifiable with a band (not to say "product"), like the bearded guy has become for Gentle Giant. But firstly it wasn't designed as logo and secondly they didn't use it consistently, not even on the subsequent albums, as their "brand mark" or as logo as such, and I doubt they used it in their letter heads (but I must admit that I never received a letter from the Rolling Stones). For me, a very identifiable image can become emblematic/iconic, but it doesn't make it a logo, which is something intentionally designed to communicate a brand name (or band name, for that matter). This wasn't designed for that purpose, nevertheless, it has become iconic for the band, without becoming a logo. I'm not sure if I'm clear in what I want to point out...

Not that I change my answers but I think this makes things a bit more flexible. Some on here were being a bit inflexible about what a logo is and admittedly my definition may have been a bit loose. To some on here logo equals image but image doesn't equal logo(I suppose).  But when you say image there's no way the GG guy and PF's prism don't qualify as those band's most recognized images. 

One of my favorite bands and probably my favorite logo.  i was always doodling this on my book covers back in my high school days many, many years ago.

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: ^My god, if the rolling stones lips and tongue isn't a band logo then nothing is.

Actually, I stand corrected: reading the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tongue_and_lips_logo" rel="nofollow - wiki-page on this, what should be a tour poster at first became intentionally something more "branding". The fact they didn't continue to use it as their logo on subsequent albums (which led me to my statements) clearly doesn't mean it was not intended as a logo (maybe ephemeral at first, but it became too iconic not to use it again).

Pretty sure Seconds Out also uses the Lamb font.

The group The Musical Box also uses the Nursery Cryme/Foxtrot font for their band, understandably.

I stand corrected then. I wasn't thinking of live albums.

Yes, Seconds out has the same band lettering(font) as lamb and also the same as and then there were three. 

Genesis live uses the same font as Foxtrot and NC. I forgot that but it makes sense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTR_%28album%29#/media/File:GTR_%28GTR_album_-_cover_art%29.jpg" rel="nofollow - https:///en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTR_(album)#/media/File:GTR_(GTR_album_-_cover_art).jpg

Anybody have a high-res rip of band logos just like the above, PNG/TIFF? Thank you in advance!

I thought that the Rolling Stones lips logo was used for the Rolling Stones Records record label though (a bit like the Beatles and Apple)

BOC...on all lp's so it is a band symbol at least.

Great band. Yeah, those first two albums were awesome. I played the hell out of them when I needed a break from Yes, King Crimson, Genesis, ELP, Jethro Tull and Pink Floyd.