Brand sound: the principle of creating memories differs from visual.

Vision requires active looking. Sound does not. When the ta-dum of Netflix plays, the brain processes it before the eyes can see the screen. This is why brand sound, even if less systematically designed than logos or colors, has the ability to create memories in a way that vision cannot replace.

Sound enters the brain through a different path.

When looking at a logo, the brain needs to recognize the shape, compare it with memory, and then attach meaning. This process happens quickly, in less than a second, but still requires direct attention. Sound is processed differently: the auditory system operates continuously even when the listener is doing something else. The brain passively receives sound and then decides whether to pay attention.

Researcher Daniel Levitin in the book This Is Your Brain on Music (2006) describes how the human brain categorizes familiar sounds extremely quickly, almost reflexively, and associates those sounds with emotional states stored from previous listens. This mechanism allows a sequence of four musical notes to evoke an entire memory.

The human brain categorizes familiar sounds almost reflexively, linking them to emotional states from previous listens.

Daniel Levitin, This Is Your Brain on Music, 2006

This explains why an audio logo (a very short sound that identifies a brand) is more effective than a long jingle when it comes to creating lasting memories. A jingle requires people to remember the melody and lyrics. An audio logo only needs listeners to hear it enough times for the reflex to form.

Sound assets: Fame and Uniqueness remain the measures.

Jenni Romaniuk in Building Distinctive Brand Assets (2018) measures the value of identity assets using two metrics: Fame (the percentage of people in the market who correctly associate the asset with the brand) and Uniqueness (the percentage of people who only associate that asset with one brand, not confusing it with competitors). This framework applies to sound just as it does to color or logo shape.

Intel's four-note chime is a classic example: Fame is very high because it has appeared on every device using Intel chips for decades, and Uniqueness is nearly absolute because no one else uses that sound sequence. These two metrics do not come from the creativity of the sound but from consistent repetition across enough touchpoints.

Sound system, not just a jingle.

In 2019, Mastercard announced a comprehensive sound identity system. Instead of a jingle, they created a short original melody, then produced dozens of variations: a version for successful payments, a version for social media ads, genre-specific versions for different markets, and a silent version with just a soft touch sound for quiet environments.

This approach reflects how a brand actually operates in practice: not through one touchpoint but through dozens. If every touchpoint uses a different sound, nothing accumulates in customers' memory. If one rigid sound is used everywhere, it will not suit many contexts. A sound system solves both problems.

Assistant voice: the brand personality speaks out loud

When a voice assistant becomes a regular touchpoint, the design question is no longer “which color” or “which font” but: is this voice fast or slow, warm or neutral, does it use familiar or professional wording, and where does it pause when explaining something complex?

Each choice conveys a message about the brand's personality. Amazon designed Alexa with a warm voice, moderate speed, and avoided technical terms because they wanted users to feel served rather than feel like they were operating technology. Apple designed Siri with a more confident voice, sometimes with a touch of subtle humor, aligning with the brand personality they had built previously.

This is a natural extension of the principle of verbal identity: the brand voice is constant, reflecting the core personality; while the tone changes depending on the situation, from when a customer encounters an issue to when they have just achieved a goal.

Conditions for sound to truly work.

In Brand Sense (2005), Martin Lindstrom argues that brands engaging several senses at once create more lasting memories than brands that rely on sight alone. But he also stresses a condition: the sensory signals must be consistent with one another and repeated often enough before they build up into an association.

This is where many brands invest in the wrong thing. They produce an audio logo that sounds good, use it in a few campaigns, then change or drop it once the campaign ends. The result is that nothing accumulates in customers' memory, because the sound never reaches the repetition threshold it needs. A brand that pays for sound but does not commit to using it long term is incurring a production cost, not investing in an asset.

When should you consider brand sound?

The practical question for a business owner is not “does sonic branding work” but “what stage is your brand at, and how many of your touchpoints carry sound?”

If a brand is not consistent in color and imagery, investing in an audio logo first is a waste because the foundation is not there. If the brand has an app, video, events, advertising, and points of sale, meaning there are enough touchpoints for sound to repeat sufficiently, then this is the time to consider a sound system, not just a jingle.

The final principle is no different from the rest of brand identity: a sonic asset gains value over time, not through the size of its production budget. An ordinary sequence of notes that appears consistently for ten years will be far stronger than a flawless audio logo used for only six months.