This site rates CD cover / liner information for the following things:

• clarity
• spine
• graphics
• information
• track numbers
• times
• readability

Many times the "artwork" overtakes the liner notes, killing readability. Other times, poor colour bleed and font choices ruin the graphics. I feel that by making this information public, a better design may emerge. A lot of time I just wonder: what were these people thinking? How can anyone read this stuff. Like 4 point fonts. (Betcha can't read that eh?) I believe that by keeping graphics simple is the best bet. Anyway, here goes. I'm not trying to pick on anyone in particular - these examples were just chosen from CDs that just happened to be on my desk at the time of this writing (June, 2004). I have only one vendetta, and that's against poor CD optics - period. I have also not commented on the artistic concept merits of the covers unless they help or inhibit the display.
 
 

I've rated the covers 1 - 5 with 5 being excellent and 1 being really bad.

Lastly, I have chosen not to display examples since they just don't translate on line at 75 dpi.

Steve Fruitman

Michelle Rasky - Your Love's Like Spring - 2004
Designed by Kurt Swinghammer by dan@bryk.com
Standard jewel case

Colour is well reproduced but by transposing the lyrics in white over a photo of green, small font almost hurts the eyes. The spine is poor - barely showing up from a distance. The tracks are numbered includes times. Web address is poorly defined - too small. The back cover is crappie - thin white on orange. Lots of space for a larger font in places

Rating: 2

A very traditional design with colour graphics but good, clean clarity. Fancy font is easy to read. All tracks are numbered and timed. Web info prominent and very good use of the spine. Pertinent information is readily accessible although the inside cover his too wordy with a very small point size - just a block printing. Nothing gets in the way of the printing - mostly black on white. Good, clean cover and back.

Rating: 4

A cheap, one page cover, simple and easy to spot. Good use of the spine - large letters. Inside is black on white, easy to read but a little messy. Track numbers and times are present. Very little info about the songs. A really basic package but generally very little wrong with it.

Rating: 3

Basic 3 color cover that's easy to read. Good font and point sizes. The back of the booklet is a problem: Gold on brown! It sort of works but could have been a whole lot better. Background graphics inside never get in the way of the printing. Names are in bold. Back cover has track numbers but no times. Excellent use of the spine.

Rating: 3

Nice, smart cover, front and back. Good Graphics with all the vital info on tracks. However, the usage of horizontal blue / black thick stripes behind white print on the inside is kind of weird. Not a joy to look at. Light blue song titles on blue background is rather pointless. An excellent spine! Fonts could have been better on the inside. Although the band has a web site, it's not on listed on the CD. Other vital info is well posted.

Rating: 2

A really nice cover with good pictures. Some of the small black font is obscured by background in places. Not all the song info re lyrics is used: only 7 of 13 songs. Therefore, the credits are incomplete. Back cover lists track numbers and times. Web site is listed but you have to search for it with a magnifying glass. Spine is not bad but could be better.

Rating: 3

Really good artwork that obscures the print. The cover pulls out to be read vertically which is highly questionable. Hard to hold since it flops around while you're trying to read it. Inside is simple white print on a black background. Lots of good info there. Back is also very artsy but the tracks are numbered and timed although blue and white font is strange to the eyes. Better than the white on light orange in the next panel. Web info not really clear. Spine clear but small.

Rating: 2

This is a very good example of what a cover / liner should do. Good colour pictures that are framed do not interrupt the text flow. Clear, large font on a small booklet, and yet all the lyrics are included. All credits are easily found. Tracks are easily readable, numbered and timed. Very good spine, bold block lettering - you can't miss it! Should have listed the tracks on the back cover instead pasting his picture with Mickey Newberry there. Web info easily found.

Rating: 4

Hey, another good cover! Great colour reproduction and layout. Nowhere is there a clash between art work and text. Large lettering and all the vital information and excellent use of the spine. Web info easily found inside but should have been on the back cover as well. The font size on the inside is a little too small but readable.

Rating: 4

A very nice front cover but that's where the niceness stops! A lot of clashing elements inside, especially where text spills over a photo with a lot of contrast. Also, blue over green is not the best thing for the eyes. The back cover is even worse: tracks 1 - 7 are purple against a painting with white times while 8 - 12 are yellow with white times. Web info easily found. While the title on the spine is easily read, the artist's name evaporates against the background. All songs are numbered and timed.

Rating: 2

This one's a nightmare! Bold red titles that bleed into the brown / black background. Song lyrics are very difficult to read against the same background. White print on brown in small block print. Tracks are not numbered but do have times listed. Web info almost impossible to read or find. Too much info in too small a font. Back cover is as bad as the rest. The front cover is warm but unfriendly to the eyes. Spine is foolish: large print but brown artist name against black in block font that is not clear. Terrible.

Rating: 1

This one's busy, a lot of text. All white font inside against a mostly darkened background of photos that works. Even has English / French text! Not the greatest cover but it does the job. Spine, also not the greatest but it's good. Tracks are numbered and timed. Web information is difficult to find. After 25 years od doing this, they should be better at it.

Rating: 3

One of the best spines you can find! Easy to read and very colourful - noticeable. Songs are numbered and timed. Great bw photos inside and large, very easy to read font - black on white. Simplicity at its finest. Credits are very good and web info, although not as large as it could be, is easy to find. The back cover is rather poorly executed: red font on yellow / red linen background. But the front cover is excellent - a tapestry that just pours out at you.

Rating: 4

Although this cover is not very slick or professional looking, it's surprisingly easy to read. The cover is clear and well reproduced. The back has the songs listed with times and track numbers. The spine could have been better contrast while the Web info is rather small. The inside is black font over a very pale background.

Rating: 3

I take it that this is a home-made design, rather simple but effective. The front cover is extremely bare, but the artist's name is in big, bold black lettering against a very pale yellow. The rest of that side of the paper is also pale yellow. Web info or mailing address is non-existent. The layout: lyrics in paragraph form, is rather crude reading but readable. Tracks are not numbered but are timed. The spine is simple: bold and big.

Rating: 3

An expensive looking booklet with a fancy font on the cover looks fine but the back cover, with the track list, is over the top. The font is difficult to read, pale yellow on a smoky orange background. The tracks are numbered but in two columns surrounding an inset photo. Very confusing. The layout is excellent but the small font, and heavy use of italics, makes a lot of it difficult to read. Variously coloured backgrounds seem to work but sometimes clash. The spine is pretty good. In all, a good example of art over info.

Rating: 2

A simple cover, a decent back cover (tracks numbered with times - small white font on dark gray / blue). But that's where the good stuff ends. The rest of this cover is terrible! Inside, on an olive green swirling background, tiny white text between dark brown tiny song titles. The tech info is just about impossible to read: the same reddish brown tiny font listed across two panels. Even with a magnifying glass and good lighting it's hellish. Why bother? Web info is tiny on the legible back. Even the spine is in tiny font.

Rating: 1

Good reproduction of original artwork: yellow on royal blue with a bit of green. No problem. The text stands out just waiting for you. Good web info in the obvious place on the back cover. Songs well listed and timed. A multi-paged booklet in bw with extremely eye-friendly font. Very nice sized. All the info you could want and more. A first class job. Even the spine takes full advantage.

Rating: 5

The outer cover is sparse and very well reproduced. The Spine is simple and easy to read. The back lists the songs by number with times including web info. So far so good! The booklet is more of the same: sparse and elegant, easy to read, bw. Nothing clashes with the retinas at all. The only problem is, the plastic tray holding the CD came broken so the disc keeps falling out. It cannot be replaced. So what good is such a lovely, well made cover? However, I am not rating the infallibility of the trays.

Rating: 4

A very ritzy production here! And yet filled with problems. The Front cover is gorgeous and easy to identify. The Spine jumps out at you: Jubilee, and yet the players' names are much too small. The back cover is dirty orange with hairline handwriting font that is difficult to read. Not all tracks listed are on their own line, so a radio programmer has to be extremely careful. Times are listed. Tracks are numbered. But the real problem starts inside with an elaborate booklet. A page of onion skin paper between each page makes it difficult for quick browsing. Info is buried inside - literally. Sunbursting yellow against orange backgrounds a verbose block of small thin text that clashes. Song credits are very difficult to discern, written out in paragraph block form. Web info is tucked away as if too precious to be displayed proudly. Bolded titles in tiny text are violet against the sunburst orange. Must have taken many hours and a lot of money to pull this wanking project together! Too much ego in the art is like the back-up band over taking the vocalist.

Rating: 1

A nice looking cover with vital information layed out nicely. The spine: white against medium blue is too faint - not bold or large enough to display. The back lists the songs, numbered and timed. However, the text is rather small. Web info prominently displayed. Bw booklet, very bold and playful. Well laid out. The font style isn't the nicest - a little too clunky and round. Too many point sizes used.

Rating: 3

A great spine - very clear and bold. The front is uncluttered and simple to see. The back is slanted text, dark red against gold and works very well. All tracks are numbered and timed. Numbers are in white circles making it extremely easy to look at, but laid out in a strange manner: two columns - odds on the right and evens on the left. Web info is not great but not bad. The inside has other mysteries: orange fine print on a dark red background! What's that all about? A hodge-podge of info on the inside but too much orange on red. The layout is thick and complicated, not easy on the eyes.

Rating: 3

The layout is very nice but the choice of font is surprisingly bad. Condensed tall characters are very difficult to read, especially the finer print. Only a wee bit of clashing in the dark end. Web info is easy to find. Use of dark blue on light blue is foolish. All tracks are timed and numbered. The back cover works well but too stingy with the spine.

Rating: 2

Very similar to Aengus Finnan's in layout and appearance except not nearly as sparse. Good big, easy to read font which clashes a bit (black against red). Nicely illustrated and laid out booklet with well chosen fonts. Even the fancy ones are easy to read. Tracks numbered and timed. Web info prominent and spine easy to spot at a distance.

Rating: 4

A perfect example of good, large, easy to read lettering. One of the few examples of a fancy use of graphics that do not clash with the text. Artistic expression suppressed to help the info stand out. Tracks are numbered and timed. The spine is a little weak - should be bolder. Even the block paragraph style of text works here. Well laid out. Web info easy to find.

Rating: 5

Another example of where simplicity is supreme. Following a nice front cover comes a back that lists 26 tracks (many short poems) complete with writing credits and times in an uncluttered way. Perhaps white on mauve / brown background isn't the most appropriate over a blurred photo of the author but clashes just a little. The inside is much the same. Bold red titles against slick black spoils the effect. Web info could be larger and more prominent. Song info is easy to read, good size and well documented.

Rating: 3

Hi Steve,
 

What a great idea, and a fascinating read!
 

You're absolutely right, that sometimes the CD designers have a real forest through the trees problem, and forget what's important to the radio
programmers (and the public!). Wearing my Brampton Folk Festival a.d. hat, I've often noticed the same sort of things when receiving solicitations.
 

I wonder how much of this is caused by the amount of real estate available. Vinyl albums, which are roughly 4 times larger than CDs, didn't seem to
have as much of this problem as CDs (although I do recall a few indiscretions of printed lyrics over some  non-contrasting backgrounds). The other
possible cause is the great proliferation of independent CDs, which weren't really available in the Vinyl days, in other words the products back then
were designed by professionals.
 

I took a look at our most recent CD (Brown Ale, "Self Titled", 2003). I think it holds up reasonably well, and I invite you to include a review of it
on you page. My partner Les worked hard on the artwork, and in the end my only regret is that the track titles (and respective MAPL logos - are they
still used?) weren't a slightly larger font, although they're still quite readable to this 41 year old. We released 18 tracks on our CD, a lot to
list, and still wanted room for a decent photo and preserve the artwork themes, which one could argue may help sell the album.
 

Indeed, it is an  interesting byproduct of the CD era, that more tracks are usually included on CDs than on vinyl, but there is less space to list
them. With that challenge, you can truly say that CD artwork really is a totally different medium than vinyl artwork,  which I miss badly.
 

Glenn

Noah Zacharin

    Although I appreciate the motivation behind what you're doing here, I'm not sure it's going to come across the way you want it to. The comments you've made are all worthwhile, indeed, and should serve as good advice to CD insert designers, whether that's the musicians on the CD or someone hired for the job.     But in the end, who is the insert aimed at? There are several groups, of course, who see and use the liner notes--the recording artist, the purchasing public, the radio announcers, the reviewers, and perhaps others. Which group should be targeted the most? Should the expectations of one group be predominant over the desired artistic effect?     If a bad artistic decision annoys one group, surely that's the risk the designer takes and--we hope--understands. Is there really a need to suggest, "Do it primarily with my group in mind, because if you don't you risk losing our support"?    Granted, radio play is important; granted, radio announcers have their preferences and needs; granted, it's not a good idea to turn announcers against your recording, via bad liner notes or in any other way.     But radio announcers are not the only group, nor perhaps the primary group, that use CD liner notes. The designer knows--or ought to know--who uses the liner notes & inserts, and why. If the designer forgets or ignores one of those groups, then maybe that person shouldn't be designing. But at the other end of the stick, the designer shouldn't be working with the needs or desires of only one group in mind, either.

    I have a good relationship with my recording engineer. He sometimes tells me about things others do in his studio--as he tells others about what I do (in generalities, of course, not breaking any confidentiality). For example, when he has a punk band in there, screaming sometimes incomprehensible lyrics against overpowering rhythms and music, he suggests they try and make the voices more understandable. They usually listen to his advice, then decide whether to take it or not. If they choose to pass over his advice, they've made an artistic decision, and he goes along with them, whether he agrees with them or not. It's their risk to take and their choice to make. He's right more often than not, but that's the way it goes.
    The situation is comparable (although, I know, not a perfect analogy). The artistic choices made on a CD liner may also be ill-advised, or they may inconvenience some users. But it's for the designer--or the musicians--to make those decisions, and they have to succeed or fail on them.

    So, I repeat, the advice you give, Steve, is valuable and should be taken into account. But radio announcers are only one factor in the creation of the CD inserts and notes, and not necessarily the primary factor.

>My intention is to get artists and record companies to consider the buyer/reader of the text on these CD covers. I really don't >believe they do.

Here I think you're mistaken to some degree--although I'm sure you're right in some cases. Some of those you describe--I can see why you'd make this comment!

Steve L.

~debbie carroll

www.debbiecarroll.com