This could just be me, but if feels like the release doesn’t start to kick in until pushing the slider to the last twenty five percent.
Would love to see the curves adjusted to release kicks in sooner and is smoother.
5 Likes
Oh me too. And have the attack scaled differently and longer times for both. I think the manual says 10 seconds but mine comes in much, much quicker than that.
2 Likes
We are talking super 6, right? I would love that very much too.
1 Like
I think we’re taking across the line, I have a Super 6 Desktop and Gemini, and they are both pretty much the same in that department.
2 Likes
While we’re talking release, I’d also love to be able to adjust the release time on the top fixed envelope in the VCA section. Maybe via a text file or something?
2 Likes
Yes, this would be great. I may have mentioned this in another thread already. Could be achieved via holding shift and moving the envelope release stage slider.
2 Likes
This could again be a parameter in a config file?
See this topic.
The idea would be to have a configuration file on the drive, kind of simple txt file containing a list of key=value lines, these setting some global or other parameters.
In this case, something like
# Envelope 1
Envelope1MaxAttackTime=15 # maximum length of attach time, in seconds
Envelope1AttackCurve=log # log/lin/exp
Envelope1MaxReleaseTime=15 # maximum length of release time, in seconds
Envelope1ReleaseCurve=log # log/lin/exp
FixedEnvelopeRelease=1.2 # maximum length of release time, in seconds
And so on 
3 Likes
@HMan the slider control has a true exponential curve. It’s possibly a bit “steep” for this application I agree. Maybe the old Curtis and SSM analog chips they’re modelled on didn’t really have a true exponential time input, maybe like an audio taper pot is not really exponential, rather often piecewise linear…
3 Likes
Thanks for your suggestions @DDS have we logged these? Thanks!
5 Likes
It’d be great to have more languorous dwells close to the end of the release stage. And a quicker drop from max attack peak. But I guess we all have our preferences on envelopes and changing the envelope curves would no doubt mess up people’s saved presets. I could go on all day about envelope shapes and curves though 
Plus I would prefer the S6 didn’t get overly complicated from the panel so there was extra potential for confusion.
I hesitate to say it but the Juno 6 is my benchmark for poly synth envelopes. But not its attack curve which is too exponential. I think the 106 was an improvement in attack phase for slow bowed attacks but ultimately suffered in pluckiness/transient quality and final release due to having a different envelope generation system (The 106’s envelopes coming from a slave CPU vs the Juno 6’s discrete chips) Interestingly on the MKS-7 Super Quartet all the envelopes for the melody and chord sections were generated by a CPU module whereas the bass voice retained the discrete IR3R01 chip as used on the Juno 6/60 and Jupiter 8, presumably for its sharper transient qualities.
One thing I do like very much about the Super 6’s fader taper is that it doesn’t kick in too quickly so you’re able to get finer control at close to zero amounts. Some modern analogues are terrible for that (Moog Grandmother for example) as they use inferior potentiometers. The faders on my S6 Desktop thankfully all have perfect feel! (: Also I appreciate sensible maximum rates, it’s less than ideal to waste a load of travel to get to 20 second timings. I guess ambient users might like that so as with most things it’s a compromise but as it stands the S6 has a pretty good range for me.
Good point, the S6 has longer fader travel, so it’s not quite as noticeable as with the SG which has a shorter throw.