I guess that with "faster" you mean that with an attack of 0, the maximum peak is reached as fast as possible, preferably instantly, and not that the course of the envelope is faster? Because the current implementation of the speed of the envelopes actually just shortens or lengthens the total time that the envelope takes.

I'd like to see the same response for the 3P when the Attack is set to 0 as if the VCA were set to GATE, because the GATE setting is really snappy (but ofc doesn't allow for any ENV behaviour).
Being able to choose a quicker or slower ENV is very useful, but is like comparing apples with pears when talking about "instant max peak".

--- In kiwitechnics@yahoogroups.com , Florian Anwander <fanwander@...> wrote:
>
> Hi David
>
> > Actually
> > As far as envelopes go my favorite for sequencing was the first version
> > on the old CPUs
> > They were as fast as you could get them in software
> I mostly agree. You could get them faster in software - as proved with
> the JP6 - but nevertheless, I never had any true problems with the rates
> of the original JX-3Ps envelopes.
>
> But I have to admit that the analogue envelopes of my newly acquired
> Juno6 are damned impressive (or the ones from my OBXa). Those from the
> Juno6 are truely an "icepick in the forehead" [TM Frank Zappa], where in
> comparison the JX-3P's envelopes are a soft "knock, knock" on your head.
> If the capabilities of the new processor allow it, then I definitely
> would welcome slightly faster envelopes.
>
> Florian
>