• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Darkglass Anagram Multi FX Announced

#3,521
I’ll echo what the others have said, ideally you don’t want to be using the Anagram with anything else especially something it has a block for or you could get a nam capture of.

I’m mainly running a nam of the JHS Punchline but I’ve got nams of loads of high end DI’s and studio pieces.

Currently playing around with a Nam of the Walrus Audio Mantle with the Jad Freer Luce in front of it.

I wouldn’t consider running either with the Anagram, defeats the point. I can get a good enough digital clone running in the box.

Honestly I think most people end up running something with their anagram because they want it on a board for tour but then there is space for something.

Some people I know run a Di after their Quad Cortex’s or Anagrams because they don’t want to wear out the xlrs on their primary unit (these are people gigging heavily)

Anyway, as you please
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnthonyBe
#3,522
silky smoove said:
My chain generally goes (from memory):
  1. Input gain set accordingly
  2. Noise suppressor
  3. High pass filter
  4. Ignissor
  5. Split block (no crossover, just to put my stomps in the bottom row full range)
  6. Merge block (return from the lower row, set to be fully wet, thus creating a serial second row rather than a parallel one)
  7. Send block (assigns output 3 for my amp ahead of anything intended only for FOH or an IEM split)
  8. Amp (in my case, the Gentle/Noble)
  9. Cab (in my case, the Shiftline HD EVM 500ms IR, blended to about 50%)
  10. Parametric EQ (final means of correcting anything that's not quite there otherwise)
  11. Limiter (set to only catch any unintended peaks, otherwise it does nothing other than providing end of chain output level control)
The lower row has all of my stomps, which are inconsequential to this discussion and entirely user-specific.
Click to expand...

Very similar to what I am doing, but I have yet to work the Ignissor in. Hopefully find some time this week!
 
#3,523
Barticus said:
Thank you, that helps…

Can you tell me more about #7?
My full signal goes to FOH, and I have an aux out to my IEM receiver, which allows me to control my own mix. Even when we use a house system, we still bring our digital mixer and a snake so we can control our own mixes.

Should I consider routing that differently?
Click to expand...
I called it a 'send' block mistakenly. It's an output block. It's just splitting off 1/4" output 3 before all of the amp and cab emulation stuff at the end of my chain. I don't want those processes going to my actual amplifier, which really only gets used for rehearsing in my studio these days as 99.9% of my gigs IEM with no amps on stage.

If I were using my Anagram as the split between FOH and IEM I would use an output block to assign XLR 1 to FOH and XLR 2 to IEM, and I would place it accordingly to remove the things I don't want sent to FOH. My main band's engineering crew has a hardware split that we send our signals to, so I just make a point of only sending a signal that works well for both FOH and my IEMs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Barticus
#3,524
Bassgeer said:
Very similar to what I am doing, but I have yet to work the Ignissor in. Hopefully find some time this week!
Click to expand...
It was a big surprise for me. Historically, I've never really liked the sound of multiband compression. I was impressed with Ignissor as I was able to dial in a setting that was more transparent than BUS, which is what I was using previously. My goal with compression is a minor reduction of dynamic range while altering tone as little as possible otherwise. Ignissor took some tweaking to get right, but now that I have it dialed in, if I toggle back and forth between it and BUS, I greatly prefer my Ignissor settings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Russ, JesseMalaska, VerdaLum0 and 5 others
#3,527
Fellow_Bassist said:
Question on the MIDI functionality. Heard conflicting information …

Can you actually have more then 3 scenes per preset by adding MIDI footswitches? (currently)
Click to expand...
No.

However, you can use midi to add alternate versions of scenes: most of the blocks have a blend control which you can use as a second bypass setting, so you can use midi to toggle blocks for some scenes but not others. For example, if you wanted a midi footswitch to toggle a chorus but only for your clean scene, you'd set the blend to 0 for the other scenes and set the midi to control the bypass. Then if you wanted to go from clean to high gain to clean+chorus, you could toggle the chorus on ahead of time while in high gain and it would be ready when you switch to clean.

If the main appeal of scenes for you is only needing one well-timed stomp per transition, this approach can accommodate that.

There are some minor annoyances though, like you need to make sure the Anagram is set to "Controlling all scenes", otherwise pre-toggling the chorus in that example does nothing. Also, some blocks don't have blend, like the phaser. Also, some blocks have a blend control that doesn't behave as expected, like the Chinchilla/Rat volume control still has an effect with the blend at 0 (maybe other drive blocks too, I haven't tested them)
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnthonyBe and Fellow_Bassist
#3,529
bigcupholder said:
No.

However, you can use midi to add alternate versions of scenes: most of the blocks have a blend control which you can use as a second bypass setting, so you can use midi to toggle blocks for some scenes but not others. For example, if you wanted a midi footswitch to toggle a chorus but only for your clean scene, you'd set the blend to 0 for the other scenes and set the midi to control the bypass. Then if you wanted to go from clean to high gain to clean+chorus, you could toggle the chorus on ahead of time while in high gain and it would be ready when you switch to clean.

If the main appeal of scenes for you is only needing one well-timed stomp per transition, this approach can accommodate that.

There are some minor annoyances though, like you need to make sure the Anagram is set to "Controlling all scenes", otherwise pre-toggling the chorus in that example does nothing. Also, some blocks don't have blend, like the phaser. Also, some blocks have a blend control that doesn't behave as expected, like the Chinchilla/Rat volume control still has an effect with the blend at 0 (maybe other drive blocks too, I haven't tested them)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the comprehensive answer. Now I have some idea whats possible.

Question is also if its realistic that they might add the option for additional (full) scene changes in the future. Is this functionality limited by processing power to ensure smooth transitions?
 
#3,530
Fellow_Bassist said:
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. Now I have some idea whats possible.

Question is also if its realistic that they might add the option for additional (full) scene changes in the future. Is this functionality limited by processing power to ensure smooth transitions?
Click to expand...
I don't see how it could be limited in any real way. No additional processing power should need to be used to perform the scene changes, no matter how many are stored. At worst, it's storing the same data as what should be in a full preset, and really that isn't much at all. It honestly surprises me when things are artificially constrained like they are now. If it only takes a few minutes for someone to write down all the settings in the current preset, it's a trivial amount of memory used.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fellow_Bassist
#3,531
Fellow_Bassist said:
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. Now I have some idea whats possible.

Question is also if its realistic that they might add the option for additional (full) scene changes in the future. Is this functionality limited by processing power to ensure smooth transitions?
Click to expand...
In addition to @Derek Williams response above which I totally agree with, when I've seen this question asked previously, the answer has generally been "No", as in, no they aren't planning on expanding the number of Scenes per Preset. Of course, that doesn't mean it can't, or won't happen. Just that it isn't on their current roadmap.

I suspect the main reasons for that is that they feel going beyond the current "1 footswitch = 1 scene" relationship will just get confusing, and it isn't a big enough problem to warrant solving for.

I've been advocating for MIDI improvements that would allow every slot to be assigned a MIDI CC (or PC or whatever) so they can be toggled on/off in any combo you want. Kinda like "mega MIDI Stomp mode" and bypassing some of the inherent limitations of Bindings and Macros (don't get me wrong, they do have their uses). If they did that, for those of use using MIDI control/automation, you could make a single Preset do so much more as you're only limited by the number of slots and the order you want your blocks in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Derek Williams, Bassgeer, Fellow_Bassist and 1 other person
#3,532
AnthonyBe said:
In addition to @Derek Williams response above which I totally agree with, when I've seen this question asked previously, the answer has generally been "No", as in, no they aren't planning on expanding the number of Scenes per Preset. Of course, that doesn't mean it can't, or won't happen. Just that it isn't on their current roadmap.

I suspect the main reasons for that is that they feel going beyond the current "1 footswitch = 1 scene" relationship will just get confusing, and it isn't a big enough problem to warrant solving for.

I've been advocating for MIDI improvements that would allow every slot to be assigned a MIDI CC (or PC or whatever) so they can be toggled on/off in any combo you want. Kinda like "mega MIDI Stomp mode" and bypassing some of the inherent limitations of Bindings and Macros (don't get me wrong, they do have their uses). If they did that, for those of use using MIDI control/automation, you could make a single Preset do so much more as you're only limited by the number of slots and the order you want your blocks in.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I was hoping for in terms of midi implementation when I bought this pedal. I asked Ivan about it and he seemed confused. Hopefully they make this an option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnthonyBe
#3,533
shon said:
This is exactly what I was hoping for in terms of midi implementation when I bought this pedal. I asked Ivan about it and he seemed confused. Hopefully they make this an option.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Having used Line 6 Helix and Hotone Ampero II which both do this, I was a little surprised the Anagram went a different path.
In many respects, bindings are just another abstracted layer you have to configure just to turn some blocks on/off, so it can actually more more work and a more confusing setup.

Anyway, I documented the request over on the Anagram Answer Wishlist and many others have Voted for it, feel free to add your vote. The more that the DG folks see this type of request being supported, the more chance of it being considered for the roadmap. MIDI Controller assignments for each slot in a Preset
 
  • Like
Reactions: shon

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back