MOTM

Interesting comments. I'd thought that summing the EG's output with a given 
CV source would be nearly as useful as a full featured (meaning reversing 
attenuated) VC Sustain input in most cases, apparently not.

The only thing I'd add to your comments is that I find that the R stage to be 
very useful in making "natural" sounding patches with a CV coming from a 
keyboard (for example) -- I found I was usually using the same CV source for 
both the D and R CV inputs which gave rise to my idea of a single input with 
reversing attenuators for the three time intervals.


I believe this discussion to be academic (unfortunately) since I haven't seen 
any interest in Paul's part on building a VC EG in some time -- but very good 
discussion nonetheless!

JB

In a message dated 4/1/2001 4:11:39 AM, jhaible@... writes:

>99% of my patches that make use of the CV inputs at all are
>controlling Decay or Sustain. A (S&H) random voltage on Decay is my
>favorite means to animate sequencer patterns. And Sustain is often
>controlled
>from a pedal or aftertouch. IMO it's important that the sustain level can
>be both increased and decreased after the attack-decay phase with the
>external
>CV. Increasing the sustain level would be lagged with the attack time
>constant
>and decreasing sustain level would be lagged with the decay time constant.
>That's the natural way to implement it, and musically very usefull and
>"smooth".
>Modulating Attack time with velocity is an obvoious choice as well.
>