Darkglass Anagram Multi FX Announced

[silky smoove]

Don't know that the guitar backgrounds have less functionality. The background shouldn't affect the controls

The graphics won't have any impact on either of those, nor was that any part of my post.

legibility matters in any visualization.

Indeed, and that's my entire point. The utilitarian look of the Darkglass UIs, IMO, are more legible than most of the fancier versions I've seen from the marketplace. My contention was that you used the term "better" when describing the fancier UIs. I think a fancier UI is almost universally worse than a simple utilitarian one without trying to cop the look of some piece of hardware.

 

[pfschim]

Anagramers...Anagramians...Anagramees...err Anagramists (have we settled on anything?) sooo, I have no background with individual pedals. Prior to the Anagram, I was a longtime Zoom user (B3, then B2 Four), and the "patch" workflow from those units is what makes sense in my mind and works for me. Because of that, Preset Mode is what I happily use on the Anagram.

I have about a dozen presets built, and I'm finding that on most individual gigs I'll really only use three or four of them. Beyond my staple tones, the rest are mostly song-specific, so depend on the setlist.

I've always been interested in understanding the other modes, but now I'd like to show the Anagram to our lead guitarist, and he's one of those guys who jumps around on a whole slew of pedals on what to me is a ridiculously huge board, so I'm sure Preset Mode isn't going to make much sense to him.

His head blew at our last gig, and a couple of shows before that, a guy fell right in front of him and basically poured a full drink onto his pedalboard...it survived and seems to be okay. But those incidents, along with a few other things, have him looking at alternatives. He actually picked up a used Kemper Rack, but didn't keep it when it quickly became clear that while it's supposedly easy to use once setup, the depth of learning required for programming to replicate his board wasn't going to work for him even with the month of July being off.

Is anyone aware of a video or tutorial that might help me break out of my current mindset? I've tried and once the unfamiliar terminology really starts flying...bindings, parallel, scenes this and scene that it makes my chest tighten and I disengage. I suppose it's possible that, without any background using individual pedals or having dove in from the start prompted by some specific personal need, I'll always have a hard time wrapping my head around the workflow and operation of the other modes, regardless of the material. Maybe this specific reason will make it different.

hey DrP, I have also more or less settled down to using presets or even stomp mode on my Anagram. I made a leap and incorporated a MIDI pedal for more switching options and all of that has worked ok. BUT .... I feel like I'm totally missing the concept of Scene mode and how I might use Scenes to make different options fit my needs better than Stomp or Preset mode do.

Also, love the description of info overload creating disengagement .... exactly the same for me. I partly attribute it to being an old guy with a diminishing attention span

Good luck working all of this out to work best for you!

 

[silky smoove]

I feel like I'm totally missing the concept of Scene mode and how I might use Scenes to make different options fit my needs better than Stomp or Preset mode do.

My take on Scene mode is that it is the most powerful and flexible mode available, and this specifically why I don't need or use it. For me, Stomp mode and the ability to build macros for each footswitch is more than enough flexibility. If I were playing music that required modifications to multiple parameters per block tied to each footswitch, then I would be inclined to use Scene mode. If I needed to toggle so much stuff at once that I had to start tap dancing, then I would know Stomp mode was no longer getting the job done. I don't really see any of the modes as being better than another, just different use cases based on player needs. If you're missing the concept of Scene mode, it might be because you don't really need it to achieve your goals.

 

[TaySte_2000]

I find scene mode and stomp mode with the macro’s fairly interchangeable but as my chain got more complex (with iem mixing and stuff). Scene mode and me not seeing the toggle for Active Scene and All Scenes meant I was making changes 3 times.

Anyway
Turn 1-2 things on/off: Stomp Mode
Switch multiple fx on and off and change some settings: Scene Mode
Whole other sound (and a gap in audio when switching): Preset Mode

You can of course do more than I’ve outlined here but this is how I’d think about it basically.

So live for me generally I’ll use stomp mode with it being
Atomic Sans / Duality Fuzz / Gain Block as my footswitches

But I might use Scene mode to do the following
Clean Sound / Slightly Gritty Sound / Huge Ambient washes turning several pedals at the end of the chain on.

Means 1 click back to clean or gritty.

I wouldn’t use preset mode for this because I wouldn’t want the audio to drop as I play the last note and click the 3rd footswitch.

Another way (since I’m rambling) to think about it is
Preset: Song
Scene: Parts of the Song (Verse, Chorus etc)
Stomp: My songs don’t have specific sounds per part I just wanna click stuff on and off when I feel like it

But there’s loads of ways to slice it, I tend to set any of my presets up with Scenes and Stomps setup for my usual gig.

I love in the new update I can hold the 3rd footswitch and just toggle between Scene and Stomp.

 

[warptheory]

My take on Scene mode is that it is the most powerful and flexible mode available, and this specifically why I don't need or use it. For me, Stomp mode and the ability to build macros for each footswitch is more than enough flexibility. If I were playing music that required modifications to multiple parameters per block tied to each footswitch, then I would be inclined to use Scene mode. If I needed to toggle so much stuff at once that I had to start tap dancing, then I would know Stomp mode was no longer getting the job done. I don't really see any of the modes as being better than another, just different use cases based on player needs. If you're missing the concept of Scene mode, it might be because you don't really need it to achieve your goals.

Well said. It's like you have a screw in your hand, and your tools are a screw driver, hammer, and a flathead. One definitely is the best tool, worst tool, and the last can kinda work if you angle it the right direction and it's the perfect size.

That's probably a horrible analogy, but that's the way I think of it. Only it's much harder than my example to know which solution is more "correct".

Anyways I'm on team Stomp mode as well. I have an MC8 as my extension, and the QuickSlots (i think that's what their called) are super easy and super functional. I want more. Like give me 4 banks of them.

I've never been more stoked about the Anagram. The more the merrier. If I could use it to dabble and get a sweet Dumble tone and then a Vox, it would be pretty awesome.

O yea, and im serious, more QuickSlot macros plz

 

[warptheory]

Last thought, I want to like skins on the controls, though some of them are starting to look like Winamp skins from the 90s, and not in a good way.

 

[drpepper]

Feel free to reach out if you have questions.

So, giving it some thought and looking at pre-planning, I decided that I wouldn't want to end up putting him off of the Anagram if I try to demo modes that aren't part of my workflow with it (making the operation look clunky, which he could put on the Anagram instead of me)

I thought probably best to try to build a preset that might answer the overall question of whether this could be a replacement for his board in terms of providing the sounds he wants.

I can do that with a run-through of potential replacement blocks just turning them on and off in different combinations. If it looks promising to him at that point, then the next step is to work out the logistics to making the operation work for him, which is clearly possible and can be approached in a number of ways...I simply can't show him. If he wants to stick with his board because he just doesn't catch the vision, that's fine too.

His setup...

Core sound chain (4 basic sounds typically used)

Boss FDR-1 (as preamp I guess, reverb and vibrato off and gets his first level of drive...I didn't catch if this would be always-on)
MXR Studio Compressor (apparently not always-on)
Boss OD-2R Overdrive
Boss MD-2 Distortion

FX (group/row split to his amp's fx loop one or combination as needed)

Boss OC-2 Octaver
Boss CH-1 Chorus
Boss HF-2 Flanger
Boss DD-3 Delay

I've looked through the block list and I guess my questions are about suggestions on best equivalents and am I not going to find direct equivalents in some cases because what I have is bass-centric? Would it be worthwhile to look for NAM captures for this purpose or just try to get in the ballpark since he'd be getting the guitar blocks if he decides to go for it?

? = Boss FDR-1
? = MXR Studio Compressor
? = Boss OD-2R Overdrive
? = Boss MD-2 Distortion

Sublime Octaver = Boss OC-2 Octaver
Mint Chocolate Chorus = Boss CH-1 Chorus
Flamingo Flanger = Boss HF-2 Flanger
Digital Delay or Modulation Delay = Boss DD-3 Delay

The amp that blew was a Blackstar Tube Amp (not sure of the model) and he likes 112 and 212 cabinets he says mic'd "at 45 degree angle and about 3 to 4 inches away"

 

[Chrishi87]

Why the guitar players are getting better amp UI's than the bassists on a bass product? We would love this kind of amp package for our core amps. We know it's doable. Like the Bass Knob has, with more controls.

Because 3rd Party companies got the assignment to do so. The Guitar Pack is NOT provided by Darkglass. The only thing you can accuse Darkglass is the black enclosure. But who am I, to judge a company which is trying to make money.
More money = More possibilitys for R&D Bass Stuff, which Darkglass (Ivan) told about 27 times on Facebook, is the main focus and will be the main focus in the future.

And - Who are "we"? Venom?

 

[IvanBassist]

? = Boss FDR-1
? = MXR Studio Compressor
? = Boss OD-2R Overdrive
? = Boss MD-2 Distortion

Boss FDR-1 = You can get a NAM capture from Tone 3000 of a Fender Deluxe Reverb or you can get the new Guitar Essentials Anagram which has a Deluxe model
MXR Studio Compressor = That is an 1176 style pedal. We have the FET Luminal compressor
Boss OD-2R Overdrive = Look for a NAM of it
Boss MD-2 Distortion = Same as above

 

[Taustin Powers]

Does that Guitar Essentials model still come with all the bass stuff intalled like the normal model? Guitar stuff is just extra?

 

[atquinn]

Does that Guitar Essentials model still come with all the bass stuff intalled like the normal model? Guitar stuff is just extra?

Yes

 

[Chrishi87]

Does that Guitar Essentials model still come with all the bass stuff intalled like the normal model? Guitar stuff is just extra?

It´s just a black Anagram with extra Plugins that are pre-installed, which you will be able to also buy in the future for the silver one.

 

[Dennis Layman]

The graphics won't have any impact on either of those, nor was that any part of my post.


Indeed, and that's my entire point. The utilitarian look of the Darkglass UIs, IMO, are more legible than most of the fancier versions I've seen from the marketplace. My contention was that you used the term "better" when describing the fancier UIs. I think a fancier UI is almost universally worse than a simple utilitarian one without trying to cop the look of some piece of hardware.

Again this is preference and opinion.

Adding additional graphics may look cool at a glance, but in general I find them less functional than a simple well-executed UI.

You did describe them as ‘less functional.’ In UI design, functionality can include usability, so that’s a fair opinion. My point was simply that adding graphics doesn’t change the function of the amp model itself—it only changes the presentation.

I appreciate clean aesthetics, but I also enjoy tasteful graphics that enhance the user experience by making models easier to identify while giving the product a more premium feel.

 

[SXBB]

Again this is preference and opinion.

You did describe them as ‘less functional.’ In UI design, functionality can include usability, so that’s a fair opinion. My point was simply that adding graphics doesn’t change the function of the amp model itself—it only changes the presentation.

I appreciate clean aesthetics, but I also enjoy tasteful graphics that enhance the user experience by making models easier to identify while giving the product a more premium feel.

I gotta say that I kinda like the pumped up graphics too!

 

[Dennis Layman]

I gotta say that I kinda like the pumped up graphics too!
View attachment 7528062
It’s really a preference thing. I really enjoy that aspect of modern plugins because it feels like you’re interacting with the real amp. The sound is always the most important part, but tasteful graphics can enhance the user experience and give it a more premium feel.


For example, the Bass Knob has the graphics, but it only has a couple of controls. I actually prefer the Peggy and especially the Flip Top because they offer more controls while still giving me that classic amp interface. The Flip Top has become my favorite because I can dial in that midrange grit that cuts through the mix so well.

 

[Dennis Layman]

The CCs remain the same.


Scene Select CC 107 1-126, 127
1: activates scene 1A

2: activates scene 1B

3: activates scene 1C

4: activates scene: 2A,

and so on.

127: activates the default scene

Scene Increment CC 108 1-127 Activates the next scene

Scene Decrement CC 109 1-127 Activates the previous scene

Thank you. I’ve attempted to change scenes on my Boss ES-5 for the Anagram using CC messages, but so far I’ve only been able to successfully send PC messages to change presets.

 

[SXBB]

Maybe DG could implement a switch so that people can decide on a basic interface or a more stylized interface? That way if you want it, it’s there and if you want more basic interface, you can have that instead. Seems like a simple thing and probably wouldn’t take up any memory or cycles.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

To me, the graphics on the guitar amp looks more polished, but that's just an opinion. Ivan mentioned there are no plans to convert the DG models to those graphics.

 

[Dennis Layman]

Maybe DG could implement a switch so that people can decide on a basic interface or a more stylized interface? That way if you want it, it’s there and if you want more basic interface, you can have that instead. Seems like a simple thing and probably wouldn’t take up any memory or cycles.

That’s actually a great idea. An optional “classic amp interface” setting would satisfy both camps without forcing either preference on anyone.

 

[bearcore]

I think everyone is underestimating the amount of time and effort it takes to develop skeuomorphic UI elements. The most well-known companies probably spend almost as much time on the UI as they do on the underlying models. Even replicating the particular type of knobs used on the real deal can be a huge pain. At scale, dev time is better spent elsewhere. For third party developers, the extra branding is worth the effort.