Rather than words, here's a mockup of some suggestions — hope you don't mind.

Penn's version reads a lot better as EB, but they all have a sideways space invader look, which I like but it might not be the image you are trying to convey.

That's fine--I mean I had basically designed THAT as you see, but it wasn't quite right.

I DO like the cut into the B, and I had not tried it that way.

Did you adjust line weight though? It feels like you did but being smaller it's hard to see the comparison in the same way.

I suppose this is a fairly logical way to draw an EB, but there just seems to be something clever about it that needs to be teased out. Maybe line weight is it. Maybe its slight cuts at corners or something. But either way (in the intricacies of type creation) that's where my expertise is in need of help.

Yeah, all I did was take your jpg and put a black box over the gaps, and a white trangle for the cut. Everything else is as you drew it.

The one thing I did notice while I was playing around with it was the line weight of the middle arm of the 'E' and the crossbar and top and bottom bars of the 'B' — it feels too light. When I thickened them though, it felt more like a 'B' in a frame. So, things to think about . . .

Another thing you might try is raising the waist of both of them since they really should have smaller top sections than bottom — they wouldn't be designed with the crossbar/arm in the exact vertical center of the character.

I know what you mean about raising the waist. I think I designed it that way originally, but wasn't happy with it.

Then i changed the weights, and am more happy. So maybe I'll try going back that direction based off this one.

I'll have to find the middle ground between more of a stamp-like mark and one that's too much like a letter. I have a feeling moving the waist might ruin it. We shall see.

I'll play with the crossbar weights first though and re-post soon.

Thank ya penn

Not sure if you have moved on, but on the first version posted, image on the right, I see CH3 or something like that. E is still hard to see and B only comes out after seeing the revision someone else posted.

As a side note: Do you think that the "do you see these letters" questions distract from the real question of how a logo communicates the intended message?

Well as I was saying, I'm very precise and enjoy mechanical, orthogonal alignments. So message is good for me. Thanks for asking. That surely is the first step.

Ah, so it's your personal branding. Sorry I didn't catch that. Giving up on the lightning bolt arrow then?

@evanbrog: Is this personal, professional or academic?

Right now it feels crowded. I think it wants to be a square instead of a rectangle? Personally, I'd look at some of the Vienna Workshop's craftsman marks for inspiration.

In order:

yes ild say a personal branding. I haven't yet given up on that E. I'm sure ild make some ppl happy if I did! Myself included. And by that I mean, if I can do something better, than that would certainly fall by the wayside. And better is better.

Next, certainly not academic. Absolutely "personal," but I'm not making it is art. I would envision a final design that I could use professionally if necessary. Either way, i want it refined and to be proud of. It would be a good exercise and potentially added to my portfolio if not my actual logo.

And finally, the square idea intrigues me. I'm 6 foot 5 inches so a vertical mark, if done right, would certainly be applicable for that reason. But I'll see how a squared version could work.

*TYPO. Meant to say I'm not making it AS art, or "it is [not] art."

Tried moving the waste up but I really wasn't happy with how that was looking.

First version has weights slightly adjusted on a few of the horizontals, as you mentioned Penn.

Second version is going more towards a square. It didn't seem to me that it can ever be a true square--but maybe less vertical.

Just a thought - have you at all tried shaping B out of the neg space in E?

While I appreciate the idea you are pursuing, I can't shake off the impression this is a symbol for some sort of a secret keymaster society from the Dark Ages. "National Treasure", Nicholas Cage, etc :)

Perhaps a direction to consider?

@apankrat:
Maybe evanbrog is from the dark ages....and a proud secret keymaster? (not that there's anything wrong with that....)

@evanbrog:
I like the direction the squared version is going, but I think the challenge is about the empty spaces. The variable thickness (of all the white spaces) is distracting; not just the white channels between the two letters, but the counters of the B, too. I want them all to match.

The multiple stroke weights are causing the letterforms to disappear into an abstract maze. The center crossbar (the "tie") of the E is too thin to feel like it's part of an E - the E becomes a C. I know you chose to match the stroke weight of the smaller B, but that choice hurts the E too much. The B doesn't look nestled comfortably into an E, it looks like a mean little robot "B" (much like R2D2) sent out a parasitic tendril to siphon off energy from a giant C. The C is about to eat the B - or crush it (it's alive! eek!)

To me, actually, your E (C) reads as a vise grip. I can't shake it.

Oh, and I swear to Tschichold I'm not tripping.

Apankrat, that was very cool! But your idea completely haha so I can't really touch it.

Anyways, I stepped away from this for a long while until it was completely out of mind. On looking at it again, what became evident to me is that every time I saw this mark (which you hadn't seen yet but had become bolder and squater)--I could basically see the EB in the small B. The large E was almost completely useless at that point, more of a bracket than an E, which some of you, rightly I think, were getting at.

So this next one isn't cleaned up but it's what felt right to me tonight.

I think it's a step in the right direction.

The relationships playing out in my head for refinement are:
1)Weight of negative spaces. I think thinner verticals and thicker horizontals keep the shape of the B while allowing for a separate (that's important) demarcation of the E.
2) Width of the whole piece--not too wide for a B but long enough arms on the E.

Suggestions?

i like where this is going, unfortunately i feel readability of the B is challenging. Might be the inner E's vertical line cut. wonder if eliminating the inner E's small vertical line would allow it to read like a EB more clearly.

Hola, I think by attempting to make the B more legible in that manner, the E will suffer. Though going back to a bit more of a vertical composition does look necessary when comparing.

Newest versions (I was thinking maybe the counterspace can help with the legibility of the B, WITHOUT making some sort of weird connection or lack thereof on the arms.

Also looking for opinions on if I should make the mark even more vertical, or if I've found that balance yet.

okay. just doesn't seem to fit your initial description of "clean and professional, and certainly perfectionist & fan of grid". not that what you'd have here isn't professional, just doesn't fit with the clean and grid part. my suggestion was to simplify the amount of visual breaks which in hopes to create a cleaner grid use. the newest version seems fence like imho.

It's still based on a grid. That much is true. With the heavier weight though it may not appear to be as grid-like.

I kind of dig this stencil look but I am just not sure about the counter shapes of the B. It seems as though they need to move both up and down, top and bottom respectively. But to do so I'll have to adjust the entire proportion again, no?