MOTM

>The 320, 280, and 390 all have their own niche, and all are useful. I
>have all three in my system.

Moe, you have everything in your system :)

>  > Although I never tried the 390, even with a second LFO it seems
>  > kind of half-assed compared to the kick-ass 320.
>
>Don't sell the 390 short. With it, you can get 4 LFOs in the space of
>a single 320. Two of those have VC, and all have LEDs (essential in
>an LFO, IMO ). Makes a great companion to the 320 - it's a waste to
>use an entire 320 as a gate generator.

That is true, although I tend you use external clocks for sync
purposes.  Is it stable??  Is it temperature compensated??

>  > The 380 might be an option.  While it doesn't have LED's or FM
>  > inputs, it has the summing feature.  Are there any 380 demos??  I
>  > think it would be easier to make a decision, if I had a better idea
>  > what the summed output did.
>
>I don't often use the individual outputs of the 380 as separate LFOs,
>but mostly use the summed output. It's the same effect you could get
>by running any 4 LFOs into a mixer. I find it most useful to have the
>lfos running at different speeds between 2 Hz and .25 Hz, just subtly
>giving a pitch waver to VCOs without sounding mechanical.

I'd try that but I don't have four LFO's or a DC mixer with four
inputs :)  As far as a varying waver goes, does it create an effect
noticeably different than using a 101??  Has anyone used it to drive
a phase shifter or flanger??  How does it sound with a ring mod??
Demos would be most helpful in answering questions like these.
I plan to record demos after I get more modules.


--
"But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine"
                                -- Titus 2:1