Darkglass Anagram Multi FX Announced

[JengDoe]

I’m currently struggling to choose between two devices.
The I/O, power, and overall size are roughly the same.

• Anagram offers more bass-related content, specifically Entropia.
• Quad Cortex has significantly more for guitar, especially amp modeling.
• Anagram does not require a MIDI footswitch, whereas for the Quad it is highly desirable.
• The Quad has a large, bright, good-looking screen, which feels very fancy.
• Anagram boots about ten times faster (the original Quad Cortex takes around 70 seconds to start up).

 

[Scott McArron]

I’m currently struggling to choose between two devices.
The I/O, power, and overall size are roughly the same.

• Anagram offers more bass-related content, specifically Entropia.
• Quad Cortex has significantly more for guitar, especially amp modeling.
• Anagram does not require a MIDI footswitch, whereas for the Quad it is highly desirable.
• The Quad has a large, bright, good-looking screen, which feels very fancy.
• Anagram boots about ten times faster (the original Quad Cortex takes around 70 seconds to start up).

Size may be nearly the same but the QC mini is nearly double the weight, if that matters.

What are you looking for? Do you double on guitar as well? QC might be the way to go right now but Anagram can hold its own on guitar with the right NAM captures and DG is exploring future expansion as well that may open up more possibilities.

QC is lacking so badly on the bass side I take personal offense to it (only jesting! Kinda…). So unless you have a special need like the Parallax plugin, double on guitar, or feel more comfortable on a battle-tested platform that’s been out for several years now, Anagram is hard to beat for bass.

 

[MascisMan]

I will add a couple more Pro's/Cons/Differences:

Anagram can use NAM profiles. QC can not
QC Mini has more processing power (same as full size QC). QCM is capable of more complex scene structures (probably why it has a longer boot time)
QC Mini has more footswitches
Anagram has seen a much more consistent update release schedule thus far than QC has historically
Anagram updates are 100% bass-centric
QC Mini is integrating Neural plugins (including Parallax which is released)
QC Mini is a better platform if you also play electric guitar (I dont think there is much argument here)
Anagram is $200 cheaper
QC Mini has 2 inputs (allowing 2 simultaneous instruments to be ran)
QC Mini runs at 12v/1.2A and Anagram runs at 9-12v/2A
Cortex Control is an arguably better desktop interface than the Darkglass Suite (subjective - based on complaints I have read about the DG Suite)

 

[silky smoove]

QC Mini has more footswitches

No argument here, but I would subjectively add that the three switches on the Anagram are more user/gig friendly than the four switches on the QC Mini.

 

[Grahams Groove]

Quick questions I couldn't find the answer to in the wiki etc:

- does the Lehle dual expression work ok, and if so, is it possible to set the toe switch to activate whatever you're using it for (wah/whammy/vol)?

The Lehle has a switch to choose TRS or RTS (Anagram uses the latter). So it will work - no idea about the toe switch though. I know it's been discussed with regard to the QC, but I don't have any experience with it.

- can you leave the anagram itself in scene mode and do complex changes on the three footswitches, and still add a midi footswitch to on/off single pedals via binds? Or are you more limited in scene mode, where you'd be stuck with things like preset up/down?

You can do what you're describing. The most efficient way to maximize control in this scenario is to use the 3 Anagram footswitches for the scene changes themselves, and then bind block parameters to your midi controller footswitches. It offers a nice mix of scene & stomp functions.

 

[Snake101st]

Awesome, thanks for that!

Now I just need to debate with myself about whether the darkglass midi footswitch is worth taking a swing on to see if it fits, or if I should go the safer route with the smaller pirate footswitch

 

[MascisMan]

No argument here, but I would subjectively add that the three switches on the Anagram are more user/gig friendly than the four switches on the QC Mini.

I can definitely see that for sure.

I wonder if putting Barefoot (or other brand) buttons on the top two switches would change that sentiment or not from a functionality/real use scenario.

As a sidenote, an interesting creative idea for the QC Mini would be to run a 3" MIDI cable from its MIDI Out to its MIDI In jack and then program one of the footswitches to send a MIDI signal to go from Page I to Page II. Then on Page II do the same thing, but, to go from Page II to Page I. Basically change from 4 switches to 6 fairly easily and without the need for an additional MIDI footswitch.

 

[_aguacate_]

Looking forward to hearing more about this.

 

[silky smoove]

I wonder if putting Barefoot (or other brand) buttons on the top two switches would change that sentiment or not from a functionality/real use scenario.

I had the same thought, but then remembered that the QC uses these interesting footswitches that double as the control pots/knobs for the parameters in each DSP block. I'm not sure how a Barefoot Button or similar would impede the use of these footswitch pots. It would probably be fine, but some caution might be warranted given how unique they are.

 

[Scott McArron]

I had the same thought, but then remembered that the QC uses these interesting footswitches that double as the control pots/knobs for the parameters in each DSP block. I'm not sure how a Barefoot Button or similar would impede the use of these footswitch pots. It would probably be fine, but some caution might be warranted given how unique they are.

Ima bout to find out with the Mooer toppers, probably Monday. I did a quick twist check with the Anagram buttons to ensure at least those have enough grip to freely spin. So far so good. We’ll see about the QCm twisty tops.

 

[Chace90]

Impulse purchased the Morningstar MC4 Pro this morning, with the intention of mounting on a small board with the Anagram. Intending to pair that with a Dunlop MVP4 Mini for MIDI CC expression control. Same thing I do on my bigger board with an MC6 Pro, HX Stomp, and SA C4. Should be fun!

 

[jjo161]

Can anyone think of a use case where it makes sense to use both the expression through midi and the anagrams expression input?

 

[Grahams Groove]

Can anyone think of a use case where it makes sense to use both the expression through midi and the anagrams expression input?

The only case that comes to mind is if you have a parameter or effect that you want to control with a linear exp pedal taper, and another you want to control with a logarithmic taper. To my knowledge, the Anagram only does linear taper (i.e. you can't adjust the exp taper), while certain midi controllers allow you to specify the taper of your expression inputs. I honestly can't think of a scenario where I'd simultaneously need both, but

 

[warptheory]

Can anyone think of a use case where it makes sense to use both the expression through midi and the anagrams expression input?

You could have the Volume Pedal always mapped to Anagram Expression, then the MIDI Expression tied to Wah, or a parameter on a block. You would need 2 expression pedals though.

 

[jjo161]

You could have the Volume Pedal always mapped to Anagram Expression, then the MIDI Expression tied to Wah, or a parameter on a block. You would need 2 expression pedals though.

That's why I wonder if the new anagram press is able to control two devices. Of course I couldn't use it on the same preset. But on a preset where no direct expression is configured, I could make use of some features going through midi.

The only case that comes to mind is if you have a parameter or effect that you want to control with a linear exp pedal taper, and another you want to control with a logarithmic taper. To my knowledge, the Anagram only does linear taper (i.e. you can't adjust the exp taper), while certain midi controllers allow you to specify the taper of your expression inputs. I honestly can't think of a scenario where I'd simultaneously need both, but

The Morningstar devices have some options indeed. Going rather logarithmic, or just sending messages when in toe or heel position.

So a dual expression might really make sense.
But at this point I'm quite certain that the anagram press is not dually usable. Otherwise they'd point it out probably

 

[Snake101st]

Speaking of exp pedals, is it possible to somehow create a macro so when the wah is activated via auto on while using your exp (off at 0), it also activates/deactivates your fuzz and/or other effects, almost acting like another footswitch for a macro/binding when you step on it?

Having a fuzz before a wah makes it so much better, but having to hit a switch then go to the wah is a bummer... That's why the Justin chancellor wah is so awesome and on my analog board

This would also be useful for a split path octave + whammy effect w delay, for example

 

[MascisMan]

Impulse purchased the Morningstar MC4 Pro this morning, with the intention of mounting on a small board with the Anagram. Intending to pair that with a Dunlop MVP4 Mini for MIDI CC expression control. Same thing I do on my bigger board with an MC6 Pro, HX Stomp, and SA C4. Should be fun!

I have my eyes on this as well!

 

[Grahams Groove]

Speaking of exp pedals, is it possible to somehow create a macro so when the wah is activated via auto on while using your exp (off at 0), it also activates/deactivates your fuzz and/or other effects, almost acting like another footswitch for a macro/binding when you step on it?

Having a fuzz before a wah makes it so much better, but having to hit a switch then go to the wah is a bummer... That's why the Justin chancellor wah is so awesome and on my analog board

This would also be useful for a split path octave + whammy effect w delay, for example

That should be achievable if you're routing your expression pedal/commands through something like the Morningstar MCx controllers, since you can assign commands to the heel-down and toe-down positions on an exp pedal. And you can definitely send multiple commands for a given action. So (at least in theory), you could setup the Anagram wah block to turn on/off at the heel down position, while also having the MCx controller send a toggle on/off command to a fuzz block before the wah - also via the heel down position.

 

[Snake101st]

That should be achievable if you're routing your expression pedal/commands through something like the Morningstar MCx controllers, since you can assign commands to the heel-down and toe-down positions on an exp pedal. And you can definitely send multiple commands for a given action. So (at least in theory), you could setup the Anagram wah block to turn on/off at the heel down position, while also having the MCx controller send a toggle on/off command to a fuzz block before the wah - also via the heel down position.

Hmm interesting, appreciate that

Planning for now to just use the anagram and darkglass midi controller, though... Maybe some day heh

 

[Chace90]

I have my eyes on this as well!

I can try and keep this thread posted about it, though it's MIDI control. Anything that can properly send the various (and relevant) MIDI messages on the correct channel will do the job

Not anticipating it'll be all that different from the MC6 Pro, aside from having built in bluetooth. I'd say I've had nothing but good experiences with the MC6 Pro. Learning curve is probably the worst thing, but I consider myself pretty technical.

Getting ForScore to talk MIDI over wireless, less easy... But that's fun too!