CC7 (volume) vs. CC11 (expression)

[AnotherScott]

The distinction between CC7 and CC11 can be vague, and most of the discussion I've seen in a quick search has either been DAW/sequence related (as opposed to performance related), and/or is specific to some environment (like what something does on a specific VST). And it is also not clear which behaviors are universal and which may vary with a board's particular implementation. So I thought some conversation here might bring some more clarity. Or not. ;-)

 

One thing that has come up before has been on clonewheel functions, where CC7 volume could be strictly overall volume, whereas CC11 expression is used to duplicate the swell pedal function of a real tonewheel organ, where the pedal can affect, not just volume, but tone and drive. Other than that, I'm not sure I've seen any other distinctions discussed here, beyond things like making sure your sending and receiving devices are set the same if your "volume" pedal doesn't appear to be doing anything.

 

If I have it right, CC11 works within the settings/constraints of CC7. So if you were using both functions, your final "127" output from your CC11 pedal (again, affecting the tone and drive on the clonewheel for example) will still not create an absolute volume that is louder than what would have been determined from a previously sent CC7, and can still be altered by a subsequently sent CC7... in effect, CC7 is like the final volume control on the output, after whatever manipulation has been done by CC11 (similar to how you can max out your expression pedal but still control the final volume through a fader on your mixer or the volume knob on your amp).

 

Yamaha guru Bad_Mister posted something at yamahasynth that I found interesting about how CC7 and CC11 affect the multiple simultaneously playing Parts you may have in MODX/Montage... 

Quote

 

If you use a pedal set to cc7 all “linked” Parts will jump to the same value and move up or down together...If however, you use a pedal set to cc11 all “linked” Parts move up and down in level together but maintain their proportional relationship.

 

I don't know if this kind of distinction when using these CC's on multi-timbral instruments is common, or if this is something more Yamaha-specific. Though at least the method of "linking" parts in the first place (allowing the pedal to affect multiple Parts that may be associated with different MIDI channels) would be system-specific (keeping in mind that CCs are sent on individual channels, and multi-timbral boards typically have different sounds on different channels).

 

If anyone has some other thoughts/experiences about how these CC's inter-relate (or don't), whether universally or on given boards, chime in!

[Delaware Dave]

bad mister's explanation is exactly how i understand the difference when talking non-organ patches.  if you have a patch that is sax and trumpet and sax is louder than the trumpet, controlling that patch via cc11 maintains that relationship where cc7 doesnt.  that's always been my understanding.  you can setup a quick test on a keyboard to prove it.

[pawelsz]

Expression CC11 is like Gain level 

Volume CC7 is like Master level 

 

[Reezekeys]

I've seen CC#11 called "secondary volume." 

 

8 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

CC7 is like the final volume control on the output, after whatever manipulation has been done by CC11

 

That's how it's worked for me whenever I've used it. E.g. on my Bidule setup I have a fader on my A800 (set to CC#7) controlling the master volume of my strings, with my expression pedal linked to another gain module before the master.

 

Looking at how you use a foot pedal to bring sounds in & out, it seems obvious why CC#11 is called "expression."

[vonnor]

MIDI CC#s are just controller numbers. There is no (verifiable) standard as to how an individual sound generating MIDI device will apply those CC #s in a given patch or multi/combi type setup. Quite often the receiving device's application of a given CC# is configurable rather than fixed.

 

That being said, I have found that on some/many patches (programs) on my Kronos, if the program is on a timbre in a Combi with the overall Timbre/track level set to say 76, if I send CC#7 it can hijack that 76 and take it up to 127 if I peg the pedal. Whereas if I send CC#11 it'll take the level from 0 to 76 as I rock the pedal forward. It will preserve the max volume/level and scale up to that. This also happens a lot in VST's like Diva.

 

~ vonnor

[JohnG11]

The way it's explained in a couple of orchestral VSTs I have is as follows:

 

Set CC#7 to the max volume you want an instrument to have within a mix, then use CC#11 (or CC#2 - breath (not both)) to set the dynamics of the instrument in any part of your score e.g. between pp and ff.

Use CC#11 to implement crescendo and diminuendo. Additionally you may need to use the control briefy to implement such dynamics as sforzando.

JohnG.

[vonnor]

19 hours ago, vonnor said:

MIDI CC#s are just controller numbers. There is no (verifiable) standard as to how an individual sound generating MIDI device will apply those CC #s...

This is why I remain somewhat confused by this discussion.

 

MIDI is a serial messaging protocol, nothing more. Little packets of data are transmitted really fast. These packets allow for a receiving device to do whatever the receiving device decides to do with those packets (with exceptions for specification standards like Program Change, Note-ON, Note-OFF, pitch-bend, aftertouch, etc.).

 

MIDI CC#7 doesn't necessarily control volume. In the B-3x vst for example, I can make CC#7 control the "leslie" slow/fast if I want to. It's a matter of configuration.

 

I once made CC#7 control the "Hard-Sync" modulator sweep in a synth patch for "One Thing Leads To Another" as well. If you think outside the box, MIDI becomes much more exciting and versatile. Learn what you can do with it, it'll blow you away.

 

I would recommend spending the time to explore the MIDI Spec, read the MIDI Implementation Charts for your gear, play around with controller assignments in your programs. I've been doing this since 1986. Everything in my rig is midi'd to everything else. Stuff is even midi'd to itself (LOCAL=OFF on every controlling device) even for live shows.

 

If I'm pressing a key on the Kronos and I want the sound from timbre/track 3 of the current Combi to come out of the Kronos audio out, I set up my Live host (Cantabile3) to watch for a NOTE-ON command coming from the MIDI IN port that the Kronos is connected to, then send that command back out the MIDI OUT port that the Kronos is connected to and set the channel for that NOTE-ON command to MIDI Channel 3 (or w/e channel timbre/track 3 is set to). 

 

I see this thread getting into how specific DAW's, instruments, VSTs and other devices handle MIDI CC#'s in their default settings, and I know from experience there are many different default setups out there depending on manufacturer. Be careful in explaining MIDI CC functionality. How it works "Out-Of-The-Box" for your stuff may not be how it works for everything or every piece of gear.

 

~ vonnor

 

 

[AnotherScott]

1 hour ago, vonnor said:

This is why I remain somewhat confused by this discussion.

 

MIDI is a serial messaging protocol, nothing more.

...

MIDI CC#7 doesn't necessarily control volume. In the B-3x vst for example, I can make CC#7 control the "leslie" slow/fast if I want to. It's a matter of configuration.

Sure, you can define anything to do anything. But knowledge of certain common conventions can be helpful. You can make CC#7 do what you want, but that doesn't mean it's not useful to know what it will do by default the majority of the time. So in starting this thread, I was wondering whether certain implementations of CC7 vs CC11 behaviors are particularly common.

 

On 5/8/2022 at 1:00 PM, Delaware Dave said:

bad mister's explanation is exactly how i understand the difference when talking non-organ patches.  if you have a patch that is sax and trumpet and sax is louder than the trumpet, controlling that patch via cc11 maintains that relationship where cc7 doesnt.  that's always been my understanding. 

Do you happen to remember which board(s) you've seen this on? Specifically, do you remember seeing a non-Yamaha work this way? Basically, I'm just looking for confirmation that what Bad_Mister said applies to how it typically works on multi-timbral boards in general, rather than specifically how Yamaha boards handle it.

[Delaware Dave]

13 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

Sure, you can define anything to do anything. But knowledge of certain common conventions can be helpful. You can make CC#7 do what you want, but that doesn't mean it's not useful to know what it will do by default the majority of the time. So in starting this thread, I was wondering whether certain implementations of CC7 vs CC11 behaviors are particularly common.

 

Do you happen to remember which board(s) you've seen this on? Specifically, do you remember seeing a non-Yamaha work this way? Basically, I'm just looking for confirmation that what Bad_Mister said applies to how it typically works on multi-timbral boards in general, rather than specifically how Yamaha boards handle it.

My Gem Equinox works as Bad Mister suggested.  If I create a preset and set the sax and trumpet programs into the preset and set the sax louder than the trumpet, assigning CC#7 makes them both go to 127, assigning CC#11 I can distinctly hear the sax still ratio'd louder than the trumpet when moving the foot pedal.

[Reezekeys]

22 hours ago, vonnor said:

MIDI CC#s are just controller numbers. There is no (verifiable) standard as to how an individual sound generating MIDI device will apply those CC #s in a given patch or multi/combi type setup. Quite often the receiving device's application of a given CC# is configurable rather than fixed.

 

True, but also common knowledge that #7 and #11 are most often associated with volume and expression and many instruments default to those assignments. I frequently assign controllers on my keyboard to do any number of things specific to the gigs I do; it doesn't make sense to use those particular CC numbers for anything remotely exotic. With my laptop's Bidule setup containing multiple VIs, I'd need to be careful with routing, channelizing, and filtering the midi stream to insure no other VIs receive the data (or go into each VI's setup and disable reception of those numbers – often not workable since I always want volume control, at a minimum).

 

Really though, why all the sturm und drang since there are many other CC numbers available that have a much better chance of not conflicting with any typical or default assignment?

 

 

[JohnG11]

As has already been said, of course it's possible to reassign any controller to provide a specific function other than the MMA "recommended practice".

 

But the MIDI 1.0 specification surely says it all labelling CC#7 "channel volume" and CC#11 "expression" (and CC#2 "breath").

 

However, if the device / software is GM1 or GM2 (General MIDI) compliant, then it MUST use the controllers as defined in the GM recommendations.

 

JohnG

(MMA forum moderator)

[vonnor]

OK I went back and re-read the 1.0 Spec from '94. The wording is cautious as far as how a receiving device should apply the "standardized" CC#'s, and the spec for the Midi Implementation Chart purposely leaves the CC def's blank. It DOES however call certain CC#s by standardized names (Volume, Damper, Expression, FootControl, Modulation, Breath, etc.) Keeping in mind that by the Spec itself, those are standardized names for the controller numbers themselves - on the transmission side. The MMA doesn't attempt to infer, define or restrict how a device applies them (or ignores them in some cases like BreathController) in it's factory patches/programs/multis/combis, etc.

 

I will concede the argument (in the classical sense of the word  ) that given the maturity of the 1.0 MIDI Spec, the majority of manufacturers apply a similar default behavior to how those CC#'s sonically effect a patch/program/multi/combi, etc., It's still a good idea to dig into the internals of patches/programs/multis/combis, etc., on your specific MIDI receiving device(s) to learn how it applies the "Standardized" CC#s. A reader of this thread may take one implementation explanation as gospel, then find their specific receiving device handles the CC#s a bit differently.

 

~ vonnor

[EscapeRocks]

I use CC7 and CC11 as many here have mentioned.

 

CC7 control overall volume from 0-127

CC11 Controls volume within that

 

On many patches, hardware or software, I set the max volume I want a patch, and assign the pedal to CC11   For example, I want  a synth patch's highest level to be  90.   I set it to 90 in the patch.

Then using my pedal as expression (CC11),  0-127 on expression, gives me 0-90 in actual output volume.  I can always override by using the sliders/faders but that's a rare occasion.

 

 

[JohnG11]

Hi Vonnor,

 

Your MIDI spec is slightly out of date, the latest version is dated '96. (Available via download at the MMA site).

 

What you need to refer to, I believe, is the General MIDI 2 spec dated 2007. Also at the MMA.

There you'll find my definitions.

 

JohnG.