>I whole-heartedly agree with Larry's thought. I did the same thing, one 380
>and one 390. That's a whole boat-load of LFOs in 2U of width.
I love the 320, but I hadn't thought about it that way :)
>My reasonin was similar to Larry's: I wanted at least one to be
>VC'able, but I'm also always using a few for free running purposes.
>∗AND∗ I didn't really want to take up 2U of space with a single LFO,
>albeit a fuller-featured one.
You could also use the summed output of the 380 to control one of the
LFO's in the 390.
Now the scary thing is that Larry only has ONE of each.
Doesn't he realize he could put a dozen LFO's in 4U?? :)
>The price is nice at $99 for each of the two, too!
>
>I'm pleased with the choice...
>
>Frank
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: J. Larry Hendry [mailto:jlarryh@...]
>Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 2:55 PM
>To: motm@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [motm] Re: Points clarification
>
>Yes, I have a thought. You can never have too many LFOs. :) And, an 320
>is a bit of overkill every time you need an LFO. 380 makes sense if you want
>complex waveforms. The 390 makes sense if you still need some voltage
>control. I got one of each. :)
>
>Larry H