Pretty much what the thread title says. When you take all the notes and offset all their tones (by an equal amount) it's called "transpose". Is there an equivalent term for doing the same for volume? Of course I could just say "offset volume" if really needed but if there's a proper term I'd rather use that instead.

attenuate maybe?

Isn't attenuation only for when the volume goes down, not up? (I suppose you could argue there could be negative "attenuation", but in the tool I'm making I'm expecting this to be used more commonly for volume going up instead of down)

It depends what you mean. Are you talking about increasing the volume (e.g. multiplying it) or shifting it (e.g. adding a value to each sample)? Example below, each number represents a value in a sound wave.

Original:

-2 -1 0 1 2 1 0 -1 -2

Multiplying:

-4 -2 0 2 4 2 0 -2 -4

Adding:

0 1 2 3 4 3 2 1 0

The reason that I ask is that increasing the volume is... just that. Shifting is equivalent to adding a zero Hz square wave, which is both inaudible to the human ear and incredibly destructive to most speakers. So I'd suggest against it.

Actually it's for a conversion tool to convert from MIDIs to a custom format using FM instruments (for an old console - yeah, homebrew). Sometimes the volume of the MIDI instrument doesn't match that of the FM instrument, so the idea is that you can tell the tool to adjust for that when doing the conversion (the tool can already do this for tones, since they're usually off by one or two octaves).

But yeah, I'm just trying to see if there's a good name for such an offset. I'm not editing a waveform at all, just the parameters of a MIDI note before it gets parsed.

Hi there Silk,

Knobs/Sliders/Faders/etc. that increase or decrease volume are usually labeled 'Volume'... one that affects e.g. all tracks in a VSTi is commonly labeled 'Master Volume' or something along the line. So, do you just not like that term or am I not getting something here?

Otherwise.. a gradual increase in volume is called 'crescendo'. A gradual decrease in volume is called 'diminuendo' or 'decrescendo'. Sudden changes in volume are indicated by the prefix 'subito' before 'piano' (quiet), 'forte' (loud) etc. Those terms are all indicating 'dynamic changes' so maybe 'dynamics' is the word you're looking for?

Best regards,
Chris

EDIT: If you're adjusting MIDI parameters that control the volume of a note then 'velocity offset' is most likely what you're looking. Unless you're referring to CC#07 of a channel, then it's just 'volume'. I've never seen anything labeled 'volume offset' personally.

The problem with the word "volume" is that it refers to the absolute value as far as I know, while what I need is a relative value (i.e. relative to the original volume). Otherwise I'd just use that. I know about crescendo and decrescendo, but besides being one-way meanings, they aren't exactly what I'm looking for (they're more akin to a volume slide).

I suppose I could just use a term like "volume scale" or something like that, does anybody have a better idea though? Or do you think that something like "[font=courier new,courier,monospace]volume 125%[/font]" instead of "[font=courier new,courier,monospace]volumescale 125%[/font]" would be clear enough?

Ah, I see. Maybe "instrument volume" or "track volume"? You're essentially re-mixing the music to account for differences between the software and hardware instrument volumes, right? So I guess look to audio mixing for your inspiration.

So, volume then? (the "instrument" part is implied) To give you an idea, this is how a real-life example would look like:

instrument fm 39 27 transpose 24 volume 133

What this tells is that:

• It's a FM instrument (there are PSG and PCM instruments too)
  
• The MIDI instrument is 39
  
• The output instrument is 27
  
• All notes are transposed 24 semitones up
  
• Volume is scaled by 133%
  
  Think this would be clear enough? (information is provided in a text file in case it wasn't clear, the tool was made for batch building because building the ROM requires a lot of steps)

I would say that's clear enough. I was thinking of gain, but after checking the technical definition it's really incorrect for this purpose.