# The difference between "Dynamics" (CC#1) and "Expression" (CC#11)?



## williemyers (Dec 12, 2016)

what's the difference, in your opinion(s), between controllers CC#1 (Dynamics) and CC#11 (Expression), as offered in a lot of libraries - such as Spitfire's "Albion" series?


----------



## Emmanuel Rousseau (Dec 12, 2016)

Expression is just volume, whereas Dynamics are... dynamics  Like if you play soft or hard on a snare drum, you won't get the same sound.


----------



## d.healey (Dec 12, 2016)

CC1 = Modulation 

http://www.indiana.edu/~emusic/cntrlnumb.html


----------



## williemyers (Dec 12, 2016)

thanks for that quick reply!


whitewasteland said:


> Expression is just volume,


so would there be any difference betweenCC#11 and CC#7?


whitewasteland said:


> whereas Dynamics are... dynamics  Like if you play soft or hard on a snare drum, you won't get the same sound.


 so, you're saying that with "dynamics" there's a timbre-shift, as well as a volume-shift?


----------



## P.N. (Dec 12, 2016)

Hi.
The midi cc can actually be implemented any way the developer wants.
In the case of Spitfire, the difference is:

CC1 is controlling the actual dynamics of the samples, and changing them on the fly (pp-mp-mf-ff) depending on the value of the continuous controller. (i'm not sure how many dynamic layers Spitfire employs, it's probably different for each product. I do believe Albion has only 2, for example). A CC value can go from 0-127, so the other levels are a combination of modulating the volume, changing the samples, and maybe some other tricks, like EQ, etc.

CC11 is basically just a volume modulator. It's like having a secondary volume slider. If you have your volume at -6 dB, and your CC11 at 50%, your overall volume will be 50% of -6 dB. (Or 50% of your CC7 - your "master" volume CC). Again, this doesn't have to be linear, it's totally dependent on the implementation of the developer.

So they are both changing dynamics, but they control different aspects of the dynamics.

I'd keep my CC11 steady at 75%, and just work with CC1. That way, i have a few "fake" dynamics reserve if i wish to achieve more convincing fortississimo moments.

Some people like to always use them combined to achieve a greater dynamic response throughout.
Others just use CC11 like a volume envelope, the same way you'd do automation with audio tracks.

Cheers.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Dec 12, 2016)

I don't touch CC7, too many volumes, too little time. Use CC11 for overall volume especially for libraries that don't fade to 0 with CC01 like Cinestrings...


----------



## Emmanuel Rousseau (Dec 12, 2016)

Well, @P.N. said it all


----------



## NoamL (Dec 12, 2016)

I use CC7 "tags" (bits of recorded MIDI) at the start of my template to set the right volume levels for balance. Other than that you shouldn't need to touch CC7 nearly ever.

CC11 I rarely touch, leave it at 127 usually. I use it on my strings since they aren't divisi-capable. So if the violas need to go divisi, I load up a 2nd viola patch and duck both patches down to CC11=64 for the duration of the divisi. CC11 is also good for fading out.

CC1 is dynamics controlled by modwheel, you should be writing this data _all_ the time (on any instrument that has modwheeled dynamics).

The practice of moving CC1+CC11 together (usually with a set of faders) seems common, but I'm against it as the result usually sounds pretty fake. It kinda sounds like if you were attending a concert where the orchestra was miked up, and someone in the back of house kept fiddling with the volume faders. CC11 does not affect how loud the orchestra sounds dynamically, just how loud they sound in volume.


----------



## procreative (Dec 12, 2016)

You have to be careful not to assume CC1 always = Dynamics and CC11 always = Expression (Volume).

For example in Hollywood Strings in some patches the Sustains and Legatos use CC1 for Vibrato Xfade and CC11 for Dynamics (they also have patches that combine Vibrato depth with Dynamics all on CC1).

Personally where a library uses CC11 just for Volume, I cannot see the point in not just using CC7 as I have an MCU Pro and tweaking instrument volumes there is easier in Logic than writing in CC.

Generally most libraries claim to offer various levels of real recorded dynamics, unless they are lying I cannot think of many using EQ and other tricks to simulate this. Some of the larger Hollywood Strings patches claim to use up to 13 layers which I think are split between vibrato and non vibrato (hence why they can be such a drain on CPU).

In my (limited) experiences of playing (and listening to others pieces), I find dynamics very useful on Strings and Brass, but in my opinion less convincing on Woodwinds as I just dont seem to hear such variances on real recorded parts and when I hear passages with too much dynamics variations it starts to sound rather odd.

Sure at the opening of a line its okay, but I think it needs to be very subtle during lines apart from places where some natural breathing might occur (although pro players seem to mask this anyway).


----------



## Kent (Dec 12, 2016)

This can be confusing because there were terms for these things, then electronics made new terms, then the technology changed somewhat and has repurposed some terms.

*Volume is loudness*. CC7, Volume, sets the loudness of the virtual instrument. if the instrument is an insert in a DAW, or hosted inside VE Pro or something which itself is inserted in the DAW, note that this doesn't change the fader/gain level in the DAW. If you're using Kontakt, for example, you'll see its effect on the fader on the top right of the Kontakt window once you open the instance. *I usually leave this alone*, perhaps setting an initial level in my template.

Back in the early days of samples and synths, the *Mod Wheel* controlled a sort of vibrato. In the MIDI standard, Mod Wheel was assigned CC1. In the last few years, however, virtual instrument developers have discovered that much more realistic playback can happen if the user is able to shift through *dynamic layers*. (Sidebar: What are dynamic layers? Depends on the instrument, but in general, acoustic instruments sound warm, dark, and/or muddy when playing softly/pianissimo, and cold, bright, and/or clear when playing loudly/fortissimo, with a continuum in-between. Many amateurs confuse the terms "dynamics" and "volume" because there is a general correlation between the two. However, in the MIDI world, it's best to think of "volume" as "loudness" and "dynamics" as "tone color/timbre tied somewhat loosely to loudness." A famous Zimmer percussion trick is that he samples his drums playing a lower dynamic - giving the sound a fullness which in a higher dynamic would be "ping-y" - and turning up the volume and/or compressing the sound for a rich yet loud and present instrument. Many developers go a little cartoonish in their quest to provide dynamics; brass libraries in particular get rather bright and tinny at _fff _whereas in real life they might do that or they might maintain a warm, big, sweet sound.) The easiest control for dynamics is *velocity*, how hard you're hitting the keys, but this has been discovered to work best for single-hit instruments - most percussion, piano, harp plucks, organ, etc., but also staccatos and the like for other instruments. For instruments that sustain, though, it sounds really inhuman (or synthy/organesque) to hold the exact same dynamic throughout the entire duration of a note - even in a circumstance in which the performer is trying to do this, there will invariably be some slight swelling and some slight diminuendo-ing, especially if the note is held out over a longer period of time. So strings, brass, and woodwinds needed a better means to control the finer shapes of their dynamics during their "longs," and the Mod Wheel was the most accessible candidate. Thus, in most modern libraries, *Mod Wheel controls dynamics*, although this is not always the case (especially in the confusing setup of the EW Hollywood series, which has been described a few posts above).

Related to dynamics, somewhat, is *natural vibrato*. Except for the clarinet family (following the French school), the piccolo flute, and a few other odd instruments, the default for most instruments is a slight vibrato of tone (what the Mod Wheel used to somewhat emulate). This is usually a good thing, for the same reason that 11 violins sound far more lush than 2 violins - it is a quirk of human hearing that the more minute deviations from the mathematically expected norm (timing, tuning, etc.), the more perfect and unified the sound becomes. Vibrato is one way of doing this, and it is also an expressive tool in and of itself. Most libraries (again, except for some outliers in EWHW) map this to CC11, Expression, but usually *a little bit goes a long way* (just as in the old use of the Mod Wheel).

To summarize, rules of thumb (take these with a grain of salt):
- Set and forget CC7/Volume
- If the instrument or patch is single hit or is otherwise controlled by it, pay attention to Velocity
- Manipulate CC11/Expression as needed
- Never/rarely ever stop moving CC1/Mod Wheel


----------



## Smikes77 (Dec 12, 2016)

NoamL said:


> I use CC7 "tags" (bits of recorded MIDI) at the start of my template to set the right volume levels for balance. Other than that you shouldn't need to touch CC7 nearly ever.
> 
> CC11 I rarely touch, leave it at 127 usually. I use it on my strings since they aren't divisi-capable. So if the violas need to go divisi, I load up a 2nd viola patch and duck both patches down to CC11=64 for the duration of the divisi. CC11 is also good for fading out.
> 
> ...



I`m wondering if the reason I am taking longer on mixes than I would like is because of "dual control". Thanks!

What would be the reason for not setting cc11 lower? Wouldn`t it be useful to have more headroom?


----------



## galactic orange (Dec 12, 2016)

kmaster said:


> To summarize, rules of thumb (take these with a grain of salt):
> - Set and forget CC7/Volume
> - If the instrument or patch is single hit or is otherwise controlled by it, pay attention to Velocity
> - Manipulate CC11/Expression as needed
> - Never/rarely ever stop moving CC1/Mod Wheel


Thank you for this very well-explained, concise post and summary!


----------



## markleake (Dec 13, 2016)

kmaster said:


> to work best for single-hit instruments - most percussion, piano, harp plucks, organ, etc.


Um... organ?  I think organ was the original "mod-wheel" controlled instrument (with your foot, rather than hand), and certainly not velocity.


----------



## williemyers (Dec 13, 2016)

guys, this has turned out to be a *very* informative thread! Thank you all for that! (and "thank you", VI-Control). I think I am getting a handle on this - particularly as it applies to Spitfire's stuff.

But let me pose these real-life scenarios;
in the first the engineer doesn't touch anything, but I, the composer, write a fermated Bb for clarinet and I mark the chart "pp - - - - F".
In the 2nd scenario, I write that sustained Bb simply as "mF" (no crescendo), but the engineer fades up as the player holds.....

Now, both of these will produce crescendi, but would one be more like a "CC1" crec. and the other be like a "CC#11" crec.?

Or would it make any difference?


----------



## Kent (Dec 13, 2016)

That's a false equivalence.

"Crescendo" is a word which can mean either:
1. An increase in the loudness of a sound (gain/volume increase)​or
2. An increase in the intensity of a sound (dynamics increase)​With most acoustic instruments, this generally goes hand-in-hand (so, in your first scenario, the clarinet crescendos from pianissimo to forte, and increases in both loudness and intensity). It's easy to conflate the two, because for most of music history, they pretty much meant the same thing.

Within the realm of recorded (or sampled) music, though, they very much do not mean the same thing. With faders (loudness manipulators), you can make a flute at piano speak over an 80-piece string ensemble at fortissimo - of course, whether you'd want to do such a thing is another story. And why wouldn't you (usually) want to, anyways? It's because, even though the flute is as loud or louder (loudness) than the string ensemble, the intensities (dynamics) don't match what you'd encounter in real life, and it seems wrong.

To think about this difference in another example, Brian Johnson of AC/DC is known to basically whisper into the microphone. Even though his performance volume/loudness is low, his intensity is very high, giving the illusion that he's doing something much bigger.

So, in your first scenario, you have a true dynamic/intensity crescendo.
In your second scenario, you only have a loudness crescendo (which you can think of as a _false_ crescendo). It will be missing the harmonic overtone shift of a true crescendo - the color won't get brighter, more present, etc. It will just be a louder soft clarinet.


----------



## Garry (Jan 19, 2018)

Just picking this old thread up, if anyone's still following...

Does it matter what the actual NUMBER is? For example: if in my midi controller, I have fader 1 to send CC30 let's say, and then in Kontakt, I associate CC30 with expression via MIDI Learn association. Will that cause problems, because it was expecting expression to be on CC11, or are the numbers just convention, and you can use whatever numbers you like?

I ask because I'm having some problems with automation being recorded correctly (I can record CC info, but I have to engage touch/latch first, and it doesn't show up in the MIDI draw section - only in the Main Window in Logic), and I'm wondering if this might be the reason?


----------



## FriFlo (Jan 19, 2018)

The difference is 10!


----------



## Saxer (Jan 20, 2018)

Garry said:


> Does it matter what the actual NUMBER is?


CC numbers are just numbers. They are used as adresses to combine a modulation source (a fader, a knob, a mod-wheel, breath controller, or any other) and a target (a function in a sampler or synth like filter, crossfade through layers, level, or any other function). If the source and target number match it will work with any controller number.


----------



## Garry (Jan 20, 2018)

Saxer said:


> CC numbers are just numbers. They are used as adresses to combine a modulation source (a fader, a knob, a mod-wheel, breath controller, or any other) and a target (a function in a sampler or synth like filter, crossfade through layers, level, or any other function). If the source and target number match it will work with any controller number.


OK, thanks. I figured as much, but certain CC numbers seem to be used synonymously with particular modulations, that I thought perhaps it could be more than just convention - thanks for clarifying.


----------



## markleake (Jan 20, 2018)

Garry said:


> OK, thanks. I figured as much, but certain CC numbers seem to be used synonymously with particular modulations, that I thought perhaps it could be more than just convention - thanks for clarifying.


The purpose of many CC numbers is defined by the MIDI specification, so in a way, yes they do have a set purpose. But in reality it doesn't matter for what you are doing, as long as both source and target know what the CC is for.


----------



## antonyb (Jan 20, 2018)

@williemyers I highly recommend's Peter Schwartz' Orchestration Realism course on AskVideo.
https://www.askvideo.com/course/orchestration301-midi-orchestra-enhancing-realism
He has this amazing ability to clear up any topics, including the specific use of CC#7, CC#11 and of course CC#1... but also much more.


----------



## Rctec (Jan 20, 2018)

williemyers said:


> thanks for that quick reply!so would there be any difference betweenCC#11 and CC#7? so, you're saying that with "dynamics" there's a timbre-shift, as well as a volume-shift?


cc 7 = Volume (for balancing your tracks in a mixer against each other and setting up the proper gain structure)
cc 11 = Expression in the amplitude domain only
cc 1 = Modulation (used to be Vibrato on most synth) but now is really Frequency (Timbre) and Amplitude combined.
But I cheat with my cc 11 and make notes impossibly quiet and loud. In other words, I use cc 11 as a 'human' compressor...


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Jan 25, 2018)

Thanks for the mention @antonyb. Comments on comments posted here in this thread. This info is "absolute", so you can take it to the bank.

• _CC numbers are just numbers. They are used as adresses to combine a modulation source (a fader, a knob, a mod-wheel, breath controller, or any other) and a target (a function in a sampler or synth like filter, crossfade through layers, level, or any other function). If the source and target number match it will work with any controller number._

There are only two universal exceptions to this rule: CC7 and CC64. It is rare, if not impossible to find a plugin or hardware synth in which CC64 doesn't activate a sustain/damper feature, or where CC7 doesn't control the main volume of the instrument.

Along similar lines...

• _The purpose of many CC numbers is defined by the MIDI specification, so in a way, yes they do have a set purpose. But in reality it doesn't matter for what you are doing, as long as both source and target know what the CC is for._

It's true that many CC numbers are associated with specific functions in the MIDI spec. But they are really just suggestions; they're not mandates or requirements. See above regarding CC7 and CC64, for which it would be just plain silly for a developer to implement them in any other way.

• ._..with "dynamics" there's a timbre-shift, as well as a volume-shift?_

Dynamics are an inherent combination of a timbre shift + a volume shift. For all natural instruments in which the dynamics are controllable, it is impossible to have one without the other.

*When are CC11 and CC7 Equivalent?
*
On the subject of using CC11 ("expression") to manipulate volume in lieu of using CC7...

CC7 and CC11 are exactly equivalent where a plugin or instrument has been programmed by a developer so that CC11 _only _controls volume. The only difference is that CC11 is rarely implemented to offer amplification. Typically, a value of 127 results in unity gain. But CC7 is often implemented to allow for an increase in gain above unity.

In Logic, for example (this might apply to other DAWs as well), using CC7 to manipulate the faders on instrument channels is implemented in such a way that a value of 90 gives you unity gain, and a value of 127 moves the fader up to +6 dB above unity -- amplification. 

For contrast... let's say you have an instrument loaded up in Logic that responds to CC11, as implemented by the developer to act as a volume adjustment only (which is often the case). CC11 values will affect the volume of the instrument at the _source_ of the sound -- the plugin itself. CC11 values from 0 - 127 change the volume from 0 to maximum without any amplification.

Now let's say that CC11 is set to a value of 127. If you were to adjust the volume fader using CC7 values ranging from 0 - 90, the amount of change in volume will be exactly the same as changing CC11 values from 0 - 127.

So which one should you use to control the volume? CC11 or CC7? It actually doesn't matter one iota as long as we're talking about patches which respond to CC11 values with a change in volume only, which as I've mentioned is often the case.

But CC11 doesn't always control just the volume. Sometimes CC11 _doesn't do anything at all_. But sometimes, CC11 is programmed to both control volume & timbre simultaneously. Other combinations are possible too (anyone who uses Hollywood Strings knows what I'm talking about). 

There are no rules or conventions dictating exactly how CC11 should or should not be implemented, but all of the previously mentioned implementations exist out in the wild. Thus you have to learn the CC11 capabilities (or lack thereof) of each patch individually. You can do this by the RTFM method (if the developer has bothered to mention it), or by trial and error. 

*An Interesting Case*

In many cases where CC11 and CC7 both act to control volume in a patch, CC11 will affect a virtual volume control positioned _behind_ the main (CC7) volume control:

*Signal* ---> *CC11* Volume Control ---> *CC7* Volume Control ("Master Volume")

In many Kontakt instruments, CC11 acts as a pre-effects volume trim, while CC7 acts (as usual) to adjust the main volume on the entire patch. Example: in patches programmed using Kontakt's native distortion effects, CC11 needs to be maxed (value = 127) to achieve the distortion sound originally intended by the programmer. If you lower the CC11 value you'll end up hearing less distortion because you're lowering the level of the original signal feeding into the distortion effect. "Pre-effect volume trim".

There are even more variations on the CC11 theme, but that's prolly enuf for now..


----------



## ptram (Oct 24, 2020)

I open this thread again, to ask another related question. When you want to make a long sustained note more animated, by either making it louder or softer in the middle or at the end, do you use CC1 or CC11?

I would think that even in this case you want the timbre to shift slightly. At the same time, I wonder if, on the contrary, you only want to change loudness, while maintaining the same tension and the same timbre for the full duration of the note.

Paolo


----------



## d.healey (Oct 24, 2020)

ptram said:


> I open this thread again, to ask another related question. When you want to make a long sustained note more animated, by either making it louder or softer in the middle or at the end, do you use CC1 or CC11?
> 
> I would think that even in this case you want the timbre to shift slightly. At the same time, I wonder if, on the contrary, you only want to change loudness, while maintaining the same tension and the same timbre for the full duration of the note.
> 
> Paolo


Either. It really depends on the piece of music and the virtual instrument you're using.


----------



## markleake (Oct 24, 2020)

Yes, as @d.healey says, it can be either. Depending on what you feel like doing, and what works better.

Often I use both. Particularly when the instrument I'm using doesn't go down to silence. This depends a lot on what else is going on in the track, as to how much effort I put in.


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 24, 2020)

I do this a lot with CC11 - a typical example is when many string longs are playing, you can swell a particular string to add interest and movement to the ensemble sound. Make your own Evo.


----------

