PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Das Ei ist hart

Das Ehepaar sitzt am Frühstückstisch. Der Ehemann hat sein Ei geöffnet und beginnt nach einer längeren Denkpause das Gespräch.

Er: Berta!
Sie: Ja....
Er: Das Ei ist hart!
Sie: (schweigt)
Er: Das Ei ist hart!
Sie: Ich habe es gehört...
Er: Wie lange hat das Ei denn gekocht?
Sie: Zu viel Eier sind gar nicht gesund...
Er: Ich meine, wie lange dieses Ei gekocht hat...
Sie: Du willst es doch immer viereinhalb Minuten haben...
Er: Das weiß ich...
Sie: Was fragst du denn?
Er: Weil dieses Ei nicht viereinhalb Minuten gekocht haben kann!
Sie: Ich koche es aber jeden Morgen viereinhalb Minuten!
Er: Wieso ist es dann mal zu hart und mal zu weich?
Sie: Ich weiß es nicht...ich bin kein Huhn!
Er: Ach!...Und woher weißt du, wann das Ei gut ist?
Sie: Ich nehme es nach viereinhalb Minuten heraus, mein Gott!
Er: Nach der Uhr oder wie?
Sie: Nach Gefühl...eine Hausfrau hat das im Gefühl...
Er: Im Gefühl?...Was hast du im Gefühl?
Sie: Ich habe es im Gefühl, wann das Ei weich ist...
Er: Aber es ist hart...vielleicht stimmt da mit deinem Gefühl was nicht...
Sie: Mit meinem Gefühl stimmt was nicht? Ich stehe den ganzen Tag in der Küche, mache die Wäsche, bring deine Sachen in Ordnung, mache die Wohnung gemütlich, ärgere mich mit den Kindern rum, und du sagst, mit meinem Gefühl stimmt was nicht?
Er: Jaja...jaja....jaja...wenn ein Ei nach Gefühl kocht, dann kocht es eben nur zufällig genau viereinhalb Minuten!
Sie: Es kann dir doch genau ganz egal sein, ob das Ei zufällig viereinhalb Minuten kocht...Hauptsache, es kocht viereinhalb Minuten!
Er: Ich hätte nur gern ein weiches Ei und nicht ein zufällig weiches Ei! Es ist mir egal, wie lange es kocht!
Sie: Aha! Das ist dir egal...es ist dir auch egal, ob ich viereinhalb Minuten in der Küche schufte!
Er: Nein-nein...
Sie: Aber es ist nicht egal...das Ei muss nämlich viereinhalb Minuten kochen...
Er: Das habe ich doch gesagt...
Sie: Aber eben hast du doch gesagt, es ist dir egal!
Er: Ich hätte nur gern ein weiches Ei...
Sie: Gott, was sind Männer primitiv!
Er: (düster vor sich hin) Ich bringe Sie um...morgen bringe ich sie um...


_________________________________

The egg is hard

The married couple sits at the fruehstueckstisch. The married man opened and begins his egg after a longer pause for thought the discussion.

It: Berta!
It: ....
It: The egg is hard!
It: (is silent)
It: The egg is hard!
It: I have it belonged...
It: How long did the egg cook?
It: Too much eggs are not healthy at all...
It: I mean, like for a long time this egg cooked...
It: You want to have it nevertheless always four and one-half minutes...
It: I know...
It: What do you ask?
It: Because this egg cannot have cooked four and one-half minutes!
It: I cook it however for each morning four and one-half minutes!
It: Why is it then times too hard and times too soft?
It: I white it... I am not no chicken!
It: Ach!... and from where you know, when the egg is good?
It: I take it out after four and one-half minutes, my God!
It: After the clock or how?
It: After feeling... a housewife has in the feeling...
It: In the Gefuehl?... which you have in the feeling?
It: I have it in the feeling, when the egg is soft...
It: There but it is hard... perhaps tunes with your feeling which not...
It: With my feeling tunes which not? I am located all day long in the kitchen, make the laundry, bring your things in order, make the dwelling cosy, annoy me with the children rum, and you say, with my feeling tune which not?
It: Jaja... jaja....jaja... if an egg after feeling cooks, then it cooks evenly only coincidentally exactly four and one-half minutes!
It: It can be all the same you nevertheless exactly whether the egg cooks coincidentally four and one-half minutes... main thing, it cooks four and one-half minutes!
It: I would have only gladly a soft egg and not a coincidentally soft egg! It is no matter to me, how long it cooks!
It: Aha! That is you all the same... it is also no matter to you whether I four and one-half minutes in the kitchen schufte!
It: No no...
It: But it is not all the same... the egg must four and one-half minutes cook...
It: I have that nevertheless said...
It: But evenly you said, it are all the same to you nevertheless!
It: I would have only gladly a soft egg...
It: God, which are men primitively!
It: (darkly before itself) I bring you over... bring I it tomorrow over...

slammah2012 wrote: It is a hardware fault if the ASB has hardware Input Jacks , and an input level control, ext input controls in the software editor, and a World of literature and press releases saying "that is what they are used for..."

well, one could argue philosophically... but effectively the hardware parts responsible for signal transfer are controlled by software only.
I dunno what's in that box, but guessing from Holger's comment I'd assume that the software switch to activate the port does not work and that part of the system is not accessible by the control software (simplyfied).

you're not at all alone wanting that feature - I've bought the software plugin for exactly that feature - and I'd rather like to unload the tonewheels

cheers, Tom

The input signal is routed direct to the output and added to the organ signal. R.D. thought this was a great idea as the user could add a drum machine, etc. without the need of an extra mixer.

The routing is done by software and it does not seem to be a big problem to change it. But you have to discuss with R.D. which is the better solution. I did - and was not very successful.

i have to say i feel for slammah2012, i mean the Scope B2003's audio inputs work in the manner he would like on his B4000 ASB - seems logocal to me. No offence Anna, but having the audio inputs go straight to the outputs is the single most useless use for an audio input i have ever heard. Sure if you've got one of those jamstation type things to play along to it might be handy, but this is supposed to be a pro bit of kit - and pros will have a mixer if they want to hear more than one source. What we're being presented with here is a home organ mentallity from the 1970s.

Like Astro, i use B2003 as an effect all the time (great for M-Tron), B4000 ASB should be able to do this.

To make a clear again:

That was just my argument (the ext. signal should go through the speaker simulation), but the responsible person did it in a different way. It should have been changed with the next software update, which did not happen. Company closed. Shit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2AjiSwBZoc

Mr Arkadin wrote: No offence Anna, but having the audio inputs go straight to the outputs is the single most useless use for an audio input i have ever heard. Sure if you've got one of those jamstation type things to play along to it might be handy, but this is supposed to be a pro bit of kit - and pros will have a mixer if they want to hear more than one source. What we're being presented with here is a home organ mentallity from the 1970s.

What!?! i thought it was the 50's! AAAARHG!!!!!

On a serious note, remember that it is not hardwired... its not something that must be fixed with a soldering iron, its all up to inDSP i guess

Anna Lüse wrote:To make a clear again:

That was just my argument (the ext. signal should go through the speaker simulation), but the responsible person did it in a different way. It should have been changed with the next software update, which did not happen. Company closed. Shit.
]

i appreciate that and i understood it the first time - i was just trying to understand why anyone would ever have thought that it was a good idea to NOT go through the Leslie, especially when that method of using the audio ins already existed in the software version .

Dr.Thoma: "The line must please the dog and not to his master."

this even beats the stupidity of a non-duophonic Odyssey emulation

couldn't resist, Tom
...duck and run...

"Spielen Sie Skat?"
"Im Moment nicht."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8iLRlmQ1Fw

astroman wrote: this even beats the stupidity of a non-duophonic Odyssey emulation

i'm not even going there...

astroman wrote: this even beats the stupidity of a non-duophonic Odyssey emulation

I have not even tried to put an input signal through the Prodyssey (filters etc) to see if the problems exist on this too or is it also a Home edition 1970's toy! If only they had listened to Anna or even put the question to this forum, they would have got sensible responses!

Soniccore or INDSP fixing the B2003 or Prodyssey! Why should they? As the actors say at auditions "What is my motivation?". They don't care and I firmly believe there will be no fix for any of the ASB's. They are defunct from a previous legacy! What financial return will there be for making these fixes to products sold by a previus company? Could we club together and pay for these fixes?

They can't even get the sound of ring moding and sync working together without aliasing. Thatgave the unique sound of the original Odyssey which they are supposed to emulate! I see more and more bad decisions and reasons that Creamware went bust when they really could have rocked the industry.

There is a simple answer: Ethics!

anyone knows how this issue concerns the inDSP expansion cards? i mean, the code is pobably compatible (well close to), and if they could combine updating the ASBs at the same time as they upgrade those to more functionality (hence making it more sought after in the market) it would be a logical move.

old customers are happy, new ones are happy.

Subjunctive mood
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In grammar, the subjunctive mood (sometimes referred to as the conjunctive mood) is a verb mood that exists in many languages. It typically expresses wishes, commands (in subordinate clauses), emotion, possibility, judgement, necessity, and statements that are contrary to fact at present. The details of subjunctive use vary from language to language.

Indo-European
The reconstructed Proto Indo-European language is the hypothetical parent of many language families. These include the Romance languages, Celtic languages, Germanic languages (including English), Slavic languages, many of the languages of the Indian subcontinent and the Iranian or Persian languages and several others. It has two closely related moods: the subjunctive and the optative. Many of its daughter languages combined or merged these moods.

In Indo-European, the subjunctive was formed by using the full ablaut grade of the root of the verb, and appending the thematic vowel *-e- or *-o- to the root stem, with the full, primary set of personal inflections. The subjunctive was the Indo-European irrealis, used for hypothetical or contrary to fact situations.

The optative mood was formed with a suffix *-ieh1 or *-ih1 (with a laryngeal). The optative used the clitic set of secondary personal inflections. The optative was used to express wishes or hopes.

Among the Indo-European languages, only Albanian, Avestan, Ancient Greek, Sanskrit, and to some extent Old Church Slavonic kept the subjunctive and optative fully separate and parallel. However, in Sanskrit, use of the subjunctive is only found in the Vedic language of earliest times, and the optative and imperative are in comparison less commonly used. In the later language (from c.500BC), the subjunctive fell out of use, with the optative or imperative being used instead. However, the first person forms of the subjunctive continue to be used, as they are transferred to the imperative, which formerly, like Greek, had no first person forms.


The subjunctive in English

Form
The subjunctive in Modern English is easily distinguished in a great variety of contexts where the sense is past tense, but the form of the subjunctive verb required is present: "It was required that we go to the back of the line." Were it not subjunctive, the form of "to go" for something in the past would have been went. Compare with the non-subjunctive: "Everyone knows that we went to the back of the line."

Other than the verb to be, the past subjunctive was distinguishable from the past indicative in Early Modern English in the second-person singular. For example: indicative thou sattest, but subjunctive thou sat.

In some texts that use the pronoun thou, a final -est or -st is sometimes added; for example, thou beest appears frequently in the work of Shakespeare and some of his contemporaries.

Present indicative Present subjunctive Past indicative Past subjunctive
to own
(regular verb) I own
he/she/it owns
we own
you own
they own I own
he/she/it own
we own
you own
they own I owned
he/she/it owned
we owned
you owned
they owned I owned
he/she/it owned
we owned
you owned
they owned
to be I am
he/she/it is
we are
you are
they are I be
he/she/it be
we be
you be
they be I was
he/she/it was
we were
you were
they were I were
he/she/it were
we were
you were
they were

As shown in the above table, the form of the subjunctive is distinguishable from the indicative in only three circumstances:

in the third person singular of the present tense,
with the verb to be in the present tense, and
in the first person singular and third person singular of verb to be in the past tense.
Additionally, the modal auxiliaries do not have present subjunctive forms.





Present and past subjunctive
The terms present subjunctive and past subjunctive can be misleading, as they describe forms rather than meanings: the past and present subjunctives are so called because they resemble the past and present indicatives, respectively, but the difference between them is a modal one, not a temporal one.

For example, in "I asked that it be done yesterday," be done (a present subjunctive) has no present-tense sense; and likewise, in "If that were true, I'd know it," were (a past subjunctive) has no past-tense sense.


The pluperfect subjunctive
Since the "past subjunctive" is not a true past tense, it uses as its past tense what is structurally its perfect aspect form. This past tense is known as the past perfect subjunctive or pluperfect subjunctive; it is formed using had (the past subjunctive of to have) plus the verb's past participle.

The pluperfect subjunctive is used like the past subjunctive, except that it expresses a past-tense sense. So, for example:

If I had known (yesterday), I would have done something about it.
If I had seen you, I definitely would have said hello.
I wouldn't be here if he hadn't helped me.
If a clause is in a past tense, then a clause subordinate to it cannot be in the past subjunctive, though it might be in the pluperfect subjunctive; however, if it is in a present tense, then a clause subordinate to it might be in either of the two, depending on meaning.

All that said, the pluperfect subjunctive is often replaced with the past subjunctive in colloquial speech, a substitution that is commonly considered incorrect. (See prescription and description.)

(Note that by contrast, the present perfect subjunctive — that he have done — while logically and theoretically possible, is not much used in modern English.)


Future subjunctive
A future subjunctive can be constructed using the conjugated form of the verb "to be" plus the infinitive or with the usage of the modal auxiliary verb "should". Note that the "were" clauses result in the present conditional, while the "should" clauses result in the future indicative. For example:

If I were to die tomorrow, then you would inherit everything.
If you were to give the money to me, then I would say no more about it.
If I should go, then will you feed the hens?
If he should fall, who will carry the flag in his place?

Construction by inversion
Where the subjunctive is used after “if” in a counterfactual condition (see below), the same effect can be achieved by omitting the “if” and inverting the verb and subject.

If I were the President... / Were I the President...
If he had a car with him... / Had he a car with him...

Construction using a modal verb
The subjunctive mood can be expressed using the modal verbs shall (should) and may (might).

Should the teacher come, I will speak with him.
(May) the Lord bless you and keep you.
He wrote it in his diary so that he might remember.
The word would (the past tense of "will") can also be used for the past (for example, "He wrote it in his diary so that he would remember"), but it cannot be used in the present or future tense ("Would the teacher come, I will speak with him" is incorrect and confusing).


Usage
As well as being preserved in fossilized phrases, the subjunctive is used in English to express a command, desire, hypothesis, purpose, doubt, or supposition.


Set phrases
The subjunctive is used in a number of fixed phrases, relics from an older form of the language where it was much more common. Some could be misconstrued as the imperative mood. Common examples are:

as it were
if I were you; were I you
be that as it may
(God) bless you!
come Monday (Tuesday, etc.)
come what may
(God) damn it!
far be it from (or for) me
till death do us part
God save our gracious Queen; long live our noble Queen.
Heaven forfend/forbid
so be it
suffice it to say
woe betide
peace be with you
long live the king
the powers that be
albeit (a synthesis of all be it)
truth be told
woe worth the day
would that it were

[edit] To express a command
Content clauses expressing commands, requests, or suggestions commonly use the present subjunctive; such a clause may be introduced by a verb like propose, suggest, recommend, move (in the parliamentary sense), demand, or mandate, by an adjective like imperative, important, adamant, or necessary, or by a noun like insistence or proposal.

This use of the subjunctive is known as the mandative subjunctive or the jussive subjunctive and is said to be the most common use of the subjunctive in English.[1]

Note that the present subjunctive is used in these cases regardless of the actual time reference (which must be conveyed by the tense of the main verb):

I move(d) that the bill be put to a vote.
I ask(ed) that he be shown mercy.
It is (or was) necessary that we not forget our instructions.
Her insistence that he leave seems (or seemed) rude.
Some of these words have two senses: one that introduces a clause in the indicative, and one that introduces a clause in the subjunctive. For example, insist can mean assert forcefully and persistently, in which case it introduces the indicative (He insisted that he was innocent), or it can mean demand forcefully and persistently, in which case it introduces the subjunctive (He insisted that he be given the chance to prove it). This use is typically North American English. The verb in such constructions is sometimes mistakenly believed to be a sort of infinitive, contributing to the notion of the dying subjunctive.

Sometimes the verb of a main clause can be in the subjunctive mood, without any explicit word like the above; this carries the force of a third-person request. This is the usage found in many set expressions, such as God bless you.

America, America, God shed His grace on thee, and crown thy good with brotherhood ("America the Beautiful")
God save our gracious Queen
The traditional English text of the Aaronic blessing is cast entirely in the subjunctive, with jussive force:

The Lord bless thee and keep thee. The Lord make his face to shine upon thee. The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace.

To express a wish
The past subjunctive is used after the verb to wish: I wish he were here or I wished he were there. This use of the subjunctive is sometimes known as the "volitional" subjunctive.


To express a hypothesis
The past subjunctive is used after the conjunction if in a contrary-to-fact protasis. For example:

If I were a millionaire, I would buy a sports car.
If he had a car with him, he could drive us there.
If I were a rich man...
In the same vein, the past subjunctive is used following the conjunctions as if and as though to express a contrary-to-fact situation that reality is supposed to resemble:

She looked as though she were going to kill him, but after glaring for a bit, she just stormed off.
He tried to explain it — as if he knew anything about the subject!
As seen in the second of these examples, these constructions are often used derisively.

Note that the past subjunctive is sometimes used in expressing situations that are not necessarily contrary to fact:

? I'm torn; if I were to go with choice A, I'd be better off in the short term, but if I were to go with choice B, I might be better off in the long term.
? Bring an umbrella; looks as if it were going to rain soon.
However, such uses are not universal, and are often regarded as ungrammatical.[2]


To express a purpose
The conjunction lest, indicating a negative purpose, generally introduces a subjunctive clause:

I eat lest I die.
I'll place the book back on the shelf, lest it get lost.
The conjunction in order that, indicating a positive purpose, also sometimes introduces a subjunctive clause, though it more commonly introduces a clause using the auxiliary verb may (or in the past tense, might):

I'm putting your dinner in the oven in order that it (may) keep warm.
He wrote it in his diary in order that he (might) remember.

To express a doubt or supposition
The subjunctive is sometimes used after other conjunctions to express doubt or supposition, although this usage is nowadays more often replaced by the indicative.

I will not let thee go, except [=unless] thou bless me. (Old Testament)
Murder, though it have no tongue, will speak.
Whoever he be, he shall not go unpunished.
But [=although] he were dead, yet shall he live. (New Testament)

Hypercorrect usage
The subjunctive has sometimes been used simply as a conditioned variant that follows "if" and similar words even in the absence of a hypothetical situation.

Johnny asked me if I were afraid. (Barbara in Night of the Living Dead (1968))
In the example quoted, "if" is a substitute for the unambiguous word "whether" ("Johnny asked me whether I was afraid"), and lacks the usual, "in the event that" meaning that it has in other usage such as "If we go to bed now, we'll be up at three o'clock".


[Demise of the subjunctive?
In many dialects of English, the indicative can take the place of the subjunctive, although this is considered erroneous in formal speech and writing. The similarity of the subjunctive and the past tense has led to the confusion between the two, and the error is evident in various pop culture references and music lyrics.

If I was President...
If he was a ghost...
If I was a rich girl...
However, in the context of the examples above, inversion cannot occur with the indicative as it would with the subjunctive; the following are ungrammatical, except insofar as they could be misinterpreted as questions:

*Was I the President...
*Was he a ghost...
Furthermore, many of the fossil phrases are often re-analyzed as imperative forms rather than as the subjunctive.

W. Somerset Maugham said, "The subjunctive mood is in its death throes, and the best thing to do is to put it out of its misery as soon as possible."

H.W. Fowler said, "Subjunctives met with today, outside the few truly living uses, are either deliberate revivals by poets for legitimate enough archaic effect, or antiquated survivals as in pretentious journalism, inflecting their context with dullness, or new arrivals possible only in an age to which the grammar of the subjunctive is not natural but artificial."

The subjunctive is not uniform in all varieties of spoken English. However it is preserved in speech, at least, in North American English, and in many dialects of British English. Some dialects replace it with the indicative or construct it using a modal verb (except perhaps in the most formal literary discourse).

heres another one; "you wish".

edit: oh and by the way, what went wrong with your ctrl-v during the we own,you own,they own I owned,he/she/it owned bit?

les gens m'appellent l'idooooole des jeunes....il y'en a même qui m'enviiiiiiiie... mais ....... etc

sorry just a temptation Russian posts are also allowed, i think ... Just kidding....

Jonathan

tak

Zicke zacke, Hühnerkacke, heu, heu, heu!

wird ja immer schilimmer hier