MOTM

The 320 LFO has VC waveshape already, as Paul mentioned. It will also work
well as an audio VCO, as long as you are not trying to track musical pitches
accurately.

Should Paul build VC waveshape into the 300 or a new 300-like audio VCO?
IMHO, no. There's not enough panel space, and it makes the VCO too expensive
and a panel space hog. I want lots of VCOs, but don't want to pay extra for
something as esoteric as waveshape control on each one.

So a better approach (again, this is just my opinion), is to have a separate
VC waveshaper on a new module. Then you have the panel space to do some cool
extra functions like clipping, and you only buy as many as you actually
would need.

BTW, when Paul releases the VC Lag Processor module one of these days, it
will be capable of turning a square wave input into a saw, triangle, reverse
saw, and all shades in between under voltage control (as long as it has
separate rise and fall time controls).

Yet another advertisement for the lag processor,

Dave

We had a fairly involved discussion about lag processors sometime last
month - check out the archives. Boy it sure would be nice to have searchable
archives ala AH...

hint hint

Dave Bradley
Principal Software Engineer
Engineering Animation, Inc.
daveb@...

You know, even though the lfo doesn't do *exactly* what I want, I'm actually
really
excited about getting one now(I can't say I was before).

I also agree with Dave Bradley that it's a fairly esoteric feature & is
probably not worth
wasting Vco panel space on. &now Dave's got me interested in the Lag
Processor--
how exactly does that work?

Tom r