Darkglass Anagram Multi FX Announced

[pfschim]

I sure hope someone captures the MXR Bass Synth. I could use it now.

My understanding of the MXR Bass Synth pedal (which I also have) is that it's a true subtractive analog synth in the sense that it converts the pitch of your bass notes into synth oscillator signals (two of them I think), so it is not just making a synth like sound like bass players often do using Octaver, Envelope and OD, it coverts the bass pitch to digital signals. I'm guessing that you could not do any kind of capture to get what the MXR does.

For me, now that I have worked out some useable signal chains in Anagram, I need to figure out how to use the FX send/return in those signal chains to include my MXR pedal.

 

[DenisLM]

A question just out of pure curiosity for those of you adding like +20db of gain to the to your presets:
How do you set up your interfaces in terms of gain and/or what are you using to monitor your sound?

Just to make sure I’m understanding, better to increase gain in the anagram vs channel preamp it’s going into because digital processing has essentially no noise floor.

When running it into my Scarlett, or Qu6 board, I need double the input gain compared to every other DI I have without adding a gain block at the end.

This.

 

[IvanBassist]

I’ve been pretty vocal about this and Anagram’s lack of a global/system input gain control. My Dingwall, which is what my Anagram sees like 95% of the time, only drives the input gain meter to about 30% of its total range under normal playing conditions. As such, things like envelope filters barely open, distortions have to be cranked to sound as expected, etc. In my case, I add a +12db gain block as the second block in my signal, right after a noise suppressor. That’s how every one of my presets starts. With that in an empty preset, the output gain sits around 66-75%, and at that point envelope filters and distortions behave normally. Our sound crew is happy with the level at that point, and my IEM mix controls behave as expected. My input to a DAW, either using Anagram as the interface, or connecting it to one of my mic pres all behave as expected at that point as well.

I don't mean this response as an attack or to be condescending, nor trying to start an argument, but I recorded this as a test:

As you can see, I can get very healthy recording levels and the gain on my interface is pretty much identical when comparing the hardware version vs the Anagram version.

To me, it sounds like your SJ has a low output. Mine does, too. I need to boost more drive on it compared to my other basses.

 

[Rodrigo EV]

I don't mean this response as an attack or to be condescending, nor trying to start an argument, but I recorded this as a test:

As you can see, I can get very healthy recording levels and the gain on my interface is pretty much identical when comparing the hardware version vs the Anagram version.

To me, it sounds like your SJ has a low output. Mine does, too. I need to boost more drive on it compared to my other basses.

Very similar outcome to me. But unlike Ivan posted previously at another post, my mixer output settings are all maxed out to 100% so that I can be very granular at each preset.

I am using an Ibanez SRMS625EX-BKF Iron Label Series (Bartolini BH2 Pickups with the original wiring in series), and either in active mode (all knobs at 50%) or in passive mode, the input in Anagram is around 50% on the left bar. After all the blocks/effects/entropias (yes, plural) I am using, my output remains at 50%.

Regardless of output I use (in-ear, XLR, or P1), pick/fingers playing, and the strings I am playing, the result levels are pretty consistent (my sound engineer and recording guys love me for that!)

I sold all my other pedals; now Anagram is the only one I use.

 

[Pep]

Very similar outcome to me. But unlike Ivan posted previously at another post, my mixer output settings are all maxed out to 100% so that I can be very granular at each preset.

I am using an Ibanez SRMS625EX-BKF Iron Label Series (Bartolini BH2 Pickups with the original wiring in series), and either in active mode (all knobs at 50%) or in passive mode, the input in Anagram is around 50% on the left bar. After all the blocks/effects/entropias (yes, plural) I am using, my output remains at 50%.

Regardless of output I use (in-ear, XLR, or P1), pick/fingers playing, and the strings I am playing, the result levels are pretty consistent (my sound engineer and recording guys love me for that!)

I sold all my other pedals; now Anagram is the only one I use.

I’m getting there Rodrigo. Planning on gathering up most of my pedals and placing them in the classifieds, hopefully today.

 

[silky smoove]

To me, it sounds like your SJ has a low output. Mine does, too. I need to boost more drive on it compared to my other basses.

I’ve described it as moderately low. It’s comparable to my MTD and both of my Jazz basses, so it’s a reasonably common output level. My point remains that a global input gain like what is found on nearly all devices that can be considered a preamp, would resolve this issue without the need for adding gain blocks on a per preset basis. Without either of these gain addition options the envelope filters are useless for me on their own, whereas any number of analog filter pedals I’ve owned have worked just fine without additional gain. This tells me that there’s a larger design issue here. A gain block works fine to resolve it, but a global input gain control makes a lot more sense.

 

[Derek Williams]

You are correct but if the Anagram can capture pedals, even If it’s an involved process of using other programs, etc., it would be worth the effort.

We can get almost all of the way there automating the process. It's something I have considered taking a crack at, at least for the simple case of being able to run your Anagram hooked up to a computer with nothing else connected. I've toyed with the idea of creating an app that uses the same audio samples that the tone3000 page has, and use those as a reference to get the pedal set how you want for the capture (to avoid all those other variables like basses with different level outputs). Wouldn't have to be specific to the Anagram either.

 

[Derek Williams]

I don't mean this response as an attack or to be condescending, nor trying to start an argument, but I recorded this as a test:

As you can see, I can get very healthy recording levels and the gain on my interface is pretty much identical when comparing the hardware version vs the Anagram version.

To me, it sounds like your SJ has a low output. Mine does, too. I need to boost more drive on it compared to my other basses.

Having it match the modelled hardware like that is great. But someone also thought there was a need for a global output EQ when we could just do that in the presets themselves. The same reasoning that gives us that EQ, is the same reasoning for having a global input gain.

 

[IvanBassist]

I’ve described it as moderately low. It’s comparable to my MTD and both of my Jazz basses, so it’s a reasonably common output level. My point remains that a global input gain like what is found on nearly all devices that can be considered a preamp, would resolve this issue without the need for adding gain blocks on a per preset basis. Without either of these gain addition options the envelope filters are useless for me on their own, whereas any number of analog filter pedals I’ve owned have worked just fine without additional gain. This tells me that there’s a larger design issue here. A gain block works fine to resolve it, but a global input gain control makes a lot more sense.

I'm a bit confused. How are you setting up the envelope filters and what kind of tone are you going after? Any references? Just looking to understand.

In case anyone wants to see a quick way how I dial them without the use of Gain blocks (no rule of thumb, as I did this super quickly)

 

[Pep]

As far as connecting the anagram to the Darkglass Suite, or NAM, my problem is with my computer, not the Anagram. I may need to purchase a new one.

As I said earlier, I took a step back and started all over yesterday and it was a great decision. Not only was I able to put together two “chains”, but with help from @BrianVengeance, on my main chain I was able to assign the foot switches to 3 pedals I use frequently.
However, I’m still not 100% sure that the Anagram is right for me.

I will never come close to using it to its full potential. I don’t use amp & speaker sims so an investment of $1199.99 seems like a lot for me to use just effects and a bit of compression. The sound I want comes from my Mesa 800D and a Greenboy F112 for monitoring purposes. I simply go “line out” from the amp “post pre” to FOH.
Also currently there are no 80s bass synth sounds I can use like, for example, the DX7, so I will need to carry my MXR Bass Synth pedal no matter what unit I end up with.
I don’t record often but when I do it’s at a local studio with everything I need to get whatever sound is required.
I can see what the Anagram is capable of and it’s potential but I believe an HX Stomp or HX Effects might do everything I need at a price that’s 50-60% less $$$.

I do love the visuals on the Anagram and once I started to understand it creating chains was easy.

If I’m overthinking this please let me know. I still have the luxury of getting familiar with the Anagram for another 30 days before it becomes non-returnable.

 

[silky smoove]

I'm a bit confused. How are you setting up the envelope filters and what kind of tone are you going after? Any references? Just looking to understand.

My go to sound is not dissimilar to what you have dialed in your example. A basic quick upsweep Mutron type sound. If I match your settings I get a sound that’s okay, but the filter action is still limited. If I turn the gain block on ahead of your settings the filter opens completely when I dig in, giving me the full range of expression with the block just by adjusting my playing technique. Without it I get a filter action that’s somewhat limited, and in my experience is the kind of filter sound that goes unnoticed in a live funk, soul, RnB mix. This is not an isolated concern for me. I’ve spoken with more than a few Anagram users online and locally who’ve expressed concerns that the filter blocks sound bad. In all but one case my recommendation of a preceding gain block has gotten those users to a spot where they either like the filter blocks, or they at least find them usable. One local player still disliked the filter blocks despite getting the filter action to work.

Again, this isn’t a filter-specific concern, that just happens to be an obvious way to demonstrate the issue. Front end gain staging should be an inherent part of the device, not something that’s reliant on the end user to add as part of a signal chain. That’s my opinion at least. Using a gain block accomplishes the same thing, it’s just a clunky approach for such an otherwise elegant device.

EDIT: I’ll also mention that adjusting the sensitivity control of the Gravitron does not yield the same results as simply hitting it with a hotter signal.

 

[BrianVengeance]

As far as connecting the anagram to the Darkglass Suite, or NAM, my problem is with my computer, not the Anagram. I may need to purchase a new one.

As I said earlier, I took a step back and started all over yesterday and it was a great decision. Not only was I able to put together two “chains”, but with help from @BrianVengeance, on my main chain I was able to assign the foot switches to 3 pedals I use frequently.
However, I’m still not 100% sure that the Anagram is right for me.

I will never come close to using it to its full potential. I don’t use amp & speaker sims so an investment of $1199.99 seems like a lot for me to use just effects and a bit of compression. The sound I want comes from my Mesa 800D and a Greenboy F112 for monitoring purposes. I simply go “line out” from the amp “post pre” to FOH.
Also currently there are no 80s bass synth sounds I can use like, for example, the DX7, so I will need to carry my MXR Bass Synth pedal no matter what unit I end up with.
I don’t record often but when I do it’s at a local studio with everything I need to get whatever sound is required.
I can see what the Anagram is capable of and it’s potential but I believe an HX Stomp or HX Effects might do everything I need at a price that’s 50-60% less $$$.

I do love the visuals on the Anagram and once I started to understand it creating chains was easy.

If I’m overthinking this please let me know. I still have the luxury of getting familiar with the Anagram for another 30 days before it becomes non-returnable.

I don’t think you’re over thinking at all. It’s all a personal journey and not every piece of gear is for everyone. From my experience compared to the HX Effects, the Anagram sounds significantly better, but that doesn’t mean the HXFX sounds bad at all. I am definitely spoiled by the size and weight reduction, and that would be the hardest part to go back to.

The modeling capabilities are definitely valuable and I’m personally looking forward to that being a little bit better integrated. One of our guitarists was able to use his QC to capture his settings from the recording season and has been able to rework some of his parts without needing a loud room and he can use it live now.

 

[Chace90]

Experimenting with the Morningstar MC4 Pro and the Anagram today. Already discovered a bug, I think?

In Stomp mode, I've got MIDI CC toggles set up for A, B & C. For both A&C, when toggled on and back off again via MIDI, the footswitch LEDs on the Anagram don't turn back to dim. Footswitch B does toggle correctly (specifically the LED behavior), no matter what. But the other two don't. Doesn't matter if the screen view is set for Bindings, Name, or Chain.

The LEDs function as expected when toggled on the Anagram footswitches. But if I toggle from the MIDI controller, the only way I've seen thus far to reset the LEDs is to either toggle the corresponding Anagram footswitch, or to quickly switch the screen view.

Changing MIDI Toggle Logic to "Value" or "Toggle" doesn't change the behavior.

 

[Pep]

I don’t think you’re over thinking at all. It’s all a personal journey and not every piece of gear is for everyone. From my experience compared to the HX Effects, the Anagram sounds significantly better, but that doesn’t mean the HXFX sounds bad at all. I am definitely spoiled by the size and weight reduction, and that would be the hardest part to go back to.

The modeling capabilities are definitely valuable and I’m personally looking forward to that being a little bit better integrated. One of our guitarists was able to use his QC to capture his settings from the recording season and has been able to rework some of his parts without needing a loud room and he can use it live now.

Perhaps I should order the HX Stomp and/or the HX Effects to do a comparison? Then I could return two and keep one. ???

 

[BrianVengeance]

Perhaps I should order the HX Stomp and/or the HX Effects to do a comparison? Then I could return two and keep one. ???

Totally up to your use case. I will say that if I had already spent the money on the Anagram, I don't know that I would have looked toward the HXFX. You may end up liking the Helix stuff better, but optimistically it would be a side-grade more than an upgrade. Both units sound great - one has maturity and options, the other has youth and promise. Both are absolutely usable as-is today.

 

[Pep]

Totally up to your use case. I will say that if I had already spent the money on the Anagram, I don't know that I would have looked toward the HXFX. You may end up liking the Helix stuff better, but optimistically it would be a side-grade more than an upgrade. Both units sound great - one has maturity and options, the other has youth and promise. Both are absolutely usable as-is today.

I watched a video where Ian Martin Allison compared the HX Stomp to the Darkglass Anagram. Of course he’s been using the Stomp for a couple of years now. He said at this point in time he prefers the Stomp, but as the Anagram adds more features/downloads/options that opinion could change.

Please don’t think I don’t like the Anagram because I love it.
I just think to make a fair and accurate comparison for my needs, and my money, I may need all 3 together.

 

[silky smoove]

I just think to make a fair and accurate comparison for my needs, and my money, I may need all 3 together.

FWIW, to me the sound quality difference between the Anagram and the Helix platforms is enough to make me never want to go back to Line 6. I spent a long time convincing myself that I liked my HX Stomp. Once I gave up and went back to analog board, and eventually to Anagram I quickly realized how much happier I was than I could ever achieve with HX Stomp. I’ll still sometimes pull up Helix Native in my studio for a quick demo on bass or guitar, but it has never made the cut on a production and has always been replaced with something else without exception.

 

[Pep]

FWIW, to me the sound quality difference between the Anagram and the Helix platforms is enough to make me never want to go back to Line 6. I spent a long time convincing myself that I liked my HX Stomp. Once I gave up and went back to analog board, and eventually to Anagram I quickly realized how much happier I was than I could ever achieve with HX Stomp. I’ll still sometimes pull up Helix Native in my studio for a quick demo on bass or guitar, but it has never made the cut on a production and has always been replaced with something else without exception.

The sound quality might be better but for application it may not be enough to warrant the additional $$$. I need to hear the difference by doing a side-by-side comparison using an A/B switch. That why I mentioned ordering the other two.
That should be an accurate way of comparing them.

 

[BrianVengeance]

FWIW, to me the sound quality difference between the Anagram and the Helix platforms is enough to make me never want to go back to Line 6. I spent a long time convincing myself that I liked my HX Stomp. Once I gave up and went back to analog board, and eventually to Anagram I quickly realized how much happier I was than I could ever achieve with HX Stomp. I’ll still sometimes pull up Helix Native in my studio for a quick demo on bass or guitar, but it has never made the cut on a production and has always been replaced with something else without exception.

This is more or less where I've landed as well. The HXFX was a great stepping stone towards the Anagram, but the Anagram simply sounds better. I've done the same thing with Helix Native, and if I'm honest, I'm spending more time in Genome lately to fiddle with NAMs and various IRs.

The sound quality might be better but for application it may not be enough to warrant the additional $$$. I need to hear the difference by doing a side-by-side comparison using an A/B switch. That why I mentioned ordering the other two.
That should be an accurate way of comparing them.

Certainly no replacement for in person auditions, but the HX Stomp may provide the more meaningful comparison - the HX Effects has an IR loader and more foot switches, but it does not offer the amp modeling that is in the Stomp.

 

[Hugsonic]

I got the Anagram and quickly sold on my Stomp. After the comp updates I sold on my compressor too. I never liked the comps on the stomp an you often see people have an external one with it (inc IMA). I did really like the Stomp but for me, the Anagram sounds better and there is a lot less effort needed get a good sound.