I really start to dislike the filter frequency scaling .
When applying a linear decaying envelope , we can clearly see how the filter responses behaves …
The first halve/part of the decaying curve is o;K. but the last part is to abrupt where it reaches 0
Changing envelope vurves have no effect on the last part of the decaying envelope .
We should need a rescaling of the filter’s freq .response
You could probably fix this with the formula device, I think the scaling formula’s for all DSP devices were posted here a while ago (can’t find them though, maybe someone can help?) - with these and a bit of maths you could set your own scaling curve…
Edit: Here is the post I was referring to:https://forum.renoise.com/t/kbd-to-filter-play-the-filter-resoance-not-quit-there-yet/44409 - Now for some maths 
Edit2: You could also stick the filters in a doofer and adjust the scaling that way, like so:
true
true
Init
Bundled Content
true
1.0
Device only
29.9999962
Device only
Cutoff
0
2
0.0
1.0
Exp Slow
50
Device only
Resonance
0
3
0.0
1.0
Linear
50
Device only
Macro 3
50
Device only
Macro 4
50
Device only
Macro 5
50
Device only
Macro 6
50
Device only
Macro 7
50
Device only
Macro 8
2
false
Init
Bundled Content
true
true
true
Init
Bundled Content
true
1.0
Device only
2x
Biquad
0.0
Device only
0.0864930972
Device only
0.5
Device only
0.0
Device only
0.00393676758
Device only
true
18
I’m talking about the polyphonic filters
I found a little relief in multiplying linear fader/curve/adhsr modules with each other, then shifting/rescaling the whole stuff with operators. It is a very fiddly business, but can result in smoother/snappier curves if done right.
For example multiply two time synced linear faders with each other - quadratic curve. Have one going from 1…0, the second from range…0 and then you can add a third addition operator to transpose the whole curve. And then you can adjust the curvature of the faders to control the slope even more.
It is the nerdiest shit, I know, but it works and makes better filter/pitch envelopes for me. For complex operations it might blow your brain or bust the 12 (I think) module limit of renoise.
Yes , there is no other option then to use multiple operators , whick kinda sucks when you want to control / automate .
I just wish the filter had a more natural decaying response , when using just one operator …especially towards the end of the decayng curve …lower frequency of the filter .
All of them fail in that department .
For example multiply two time synced linear faders with each other - quadratic curve.
Yes, I did this as well, except with four linear faders 
It’s a bitch to adjust the Macro controls, though. But the envelope really sounds smoother and nicer this way, a lot better than whatever the curve shape setting does on the Fader modulation device.
Next time I’ll try just a quadratic one. The curve doesn’t look quite as good, so I added more, but I should judge it by sound, not by looks.
(sorry about the late edit, I messed up some keypresses writing this post)
yeah with some math magic you can get very nice responses. also the faders are most rewarding for the multiplication trick, due to their selectable curves…for simple envelopes they can work very well
though it can be a little sick and evil mind game to set things up - I mean it can be fun, but it sometimes eats more time than such things are supposed to. still I find it has to be done to make renoise sound better.
here look at this instrument. I made the curvature of a filter decay automatable!