What's this sample called?

[BertKoor]

in the spirit of never explain a joke:
[/i]

[BertKoor]

So next I'd like to know about the lenghts of the sounds. [...] So all notes except for C4 are the "unnatural" ones who are just time stretched to get some other pitches and they have not been adapted properly in lenghts then (in a way). What's your opinion on it? Could we say it like that?

The ancient samplers did not stretch time (as we know it now). They just changed the playback speed, which is a very basic process.

Say the original sample is note C4 sampled at 32kHz with a duration of 0.1 seconds. That is 0.1 * 32000 = 3200 sample values.
Play it back an octave lower (sampling rate 16kHz) then it takes 0.2 seconds to get through those 3200 sample values.

[Viktor [TUC]]

Hi Juno,

I appreciate your curiosity and trying to get to the bottom of things, but I've got a lot of work currently, can't dive too deep into this. My advise, experiment, repeat, start again, experiment some more. Even if someone gives your concrete numbers and values, you'll learn more when you find the right settings on your own, with the help that's been provided here.

But to reiterate, I moved the start point of the sample a bit, to have it start slightly later. And I set the envelope release time so that the sample stops when I let go of the note, and then just played a short note. I didn't adjust tiny details, I don't feel they're that important as long as the general feel is there. And I remember I removed low frequencies with an EQ, then added reverb.

If you experiment with these things, eventually your ear will guide you, it might take a bit as a beginner, but don't worry and take your time.

[juno987654321]

I moved the start point of the sample a bit, to have it start slightly later.

OK, thanks. By the above sentence you could refer to the higher pitched second note in d5. You made it start somewhat later than d4 rather than stretch the sample in d5 to make it last as long as the one in d4. That would make sense. So as Bert suggested you didn't choose to stretch the sound in d5 to compensate for what they did - only change playback speed to automatically change pitches with that.

But you could also refer to cutting off the onset of both sounds a bit? Would that also make sense at all?

[BertKoor]

In the whole sample you hear a flute or whatever play a fast-as-possible sequence (flute way to play glissando) "G A B C" (presuming the sample root is C) which sounds a bit like "fliiieeep".
By shifting the start point hmmm 50ms maybe (ya have to experiment) that part gets skipped, making the tone more stable but also with less attack/transient: "wiieeep"!

That's just an artistic decision, cutting a small section of a classical piece which was one side of an LP maybe 20 minutes long. Cut out the 200ms you like most and fits your musical purpose.

Don't overthink it. The machine allowes the user to set start point for sample playback, so users do that to their liking.

Exact length of the sample is not so relevant.
The musicians in the orchestra watch the conductor and mainly strive to hit the climax of their notes at the same time. If you study closely, you find timing of classical orchestra members is all over the place.

If you play the sample by hand you will do the same. You know the note needs to be presses somewhat early for the "hit" part to land on the desired time. Little bit of practice, not much practice is actually needed. If you hit a drum with a stick or clap your hands, your arm starts the movement earlier than the time you need the hit to sound. This is natural, goes without thinking.

If you only put notes on a grid with a mouse, oh shudder.

Does this explain anything?

[juno987654321]

Yes it does, Bert. Interesting analysis with the flute part in the sample.