What limitations, if any, are there in using the Motif XF with a DAW that is not Cubase?  For example, does the planned XF editor software run Standalone or as a standard VST plugin which does not require Cubase?  Also,does the optional FW interface require some version of Cubase to work properly?

I know Yamaha now owns Steinberg but I want to use a different DAW (Sonar).  Thanks.

As I understand it - there is a standalone Editor and a VST Editor (as with the XS) - which does not require Cubase.

If you read through the information Athan (Yamaha_US) posted you will find the details on this.

“There will be a Studio Manager editor coming soon. Also Steinberg announced a few days ago new SDK for VST3 developers with a wrapper for AU and VST2. In the future this may be possible.”

There DAW Remote Templates for Cubase, Logic, Sonar, and Digital Performer built-in. And like the mLAN16E2/Firewire interface it does not require any particular software to work properly - it simply requires software that can accept an ASIO protocol driver.

If you want to quickly track in something that you wrote on the Motif to Sonar via FW/Asio, that will work fine. It is certainly faster than having to track in each part soloed.

However, using the Motif as a tone generator from Sonar, with the intention of live-busing in the Motif’s output while you record won’t work so well. Said another way, if you want to use the Motif like a softsynth, where you have several MIDI tracks controlling the tone generator, and different groups of MIDI tracks coming back in to Sonar in real-time through audio tracks with inputs set to FW/Asio channels, it will disappoint you. I wasted months and months of my life trying to get this to work with the XS.

The sound that you hear from the Motif audio tracks in Sonar will be delayed by the input latency time of your audio interface. You’ll notice, for example, that your Motif tracks lag behind your softsynth tracks, just slightly. In situations like this, the DAW is supposed to delay the softsynths to match the latency of the incoming signal from the external instrument. Yamaha does that in Cubase. In Cubase, though, you have the benefit of specific Motif support. In Sonar, you’re just receiving raw from the Motif.

Cakewalk has their own system for compensating for the lag from using external synths. They use it with the Roland VS synth that is part of their VS-700 system. They also have generic support for delay compensation for external effects, but not for external synths. They could, but I don’t think that they’d like to.

VSTs can force the host to lag a specific amount of time for them to do their thing. For example, a complex effect, that needs a large buffer, can cause the host to work on a long delay, so that it has time to fill that buffer. Yamaha could make a VST that included this delay, which would cause the host to appropriately lag. Actually, they have, but it is VST3 only, which not many DAW manufacturers seem eager to support. Cakewalk told me in no uncertain terms that they didn’t see a real advantage in VST3, and so didn’t plan to spend dev resources on it. Could Yamaha make this idea work without VST3? Perhaps, but they’d probably rather that you buy Cubase. Cakewalk also won’t support VST3, and help you with your Motif, as they’d rather you buy their Fantom VS. So, if you really want to use the Motif like a softsynth, you use Cubase, or pretty much forget it.

If you want to use the Motif with Sonar, you won’t be integrating it in to the mixing environment in real-time, unless you plan to avoid using softsynths (so there isn’t anything on the host to sync with). If you have the FW interface, you can track in your projects authored on the motif in one pass, or else you can work the old MIDI workstation way of using Sonar as a MIDI sequencer and tracking in the Motif’s stereo mix.

I haven’t seen anything about the XF to make me think that the situation has changed. The latency compensation is the issue. Someone has to fix that, or else you have to not care about tight timing and lag.

Yes… Logic, rabble rabble. Softsynths, rabble, rabble. Both have their place. Motif is really easy to use as long as you’re working inside the Motif, which is, I think, the point of a workstation. Computer-based DAWs seem to work the same way. Basically, to me, Motif = work on just the Motif, and computer = use softsynths. Trying to mix the two dramatically increases complexity to the point where I don’t care to think about it anymore. I’m so done with Sysex commands and bulk dumps, having to worry about MIDI and audio gear clock sync issues, etc. Recalling a Motif project and just having it play is great. Recalling a project in a DAW and having it just play is great, to. Mixing softsynths and external MIDI gear, though, puts you right back in the 90’s, worrying about gear sync and recall issues. You can spend so much time being a keyboard tech instead of recording.

It should be pointed out that Steinberg compensation works the same whether it is Yamaha, Korg, Roland or analog synth thru an interface.

The fact that Cakewalk uses VST , but doesn’t want to support VST3 is not an issue that Yamaha can solve. 

In the end, however you are right. As long as this issue exists, it’s difficult to truly integrate the Motif as a VST into Sonar’s mixes effectively.  You can record the audio, but using the Motif as a softsynth in Sonar is difficult.

BSmart - Thanks for a really great posting that puts in clear terms the horror of timing issues in Sonar when trying to integrate Motif. I like the interface better than Cubase, but if you make the Yamaha hardware decision, you might as well go with them (Cubase) on the DAW, if that’s what you want to do. Your point of a workstation as a stand-alone solution is spot on as well.

A few years ago I spent countless hours and many dollars trying to get good results and frankly gave up on it all and since that time use my ES as a workstation and simply record audio into a DAW when I want to make recordings. Not as high tech, but it sure as hell works! The best part is that I have not had to work as a computer tech instead of a musician since making that decision.

I think the lines are clearly drawn more than ever before: Sonar=Roland and Cubase=Yamaha. Actually, it seems a logical ending point when you think about it. There are sufficient technical issues with all the different computer hardware and software combinations out there that keyboard manufacturers have no control over. Any variability they can eliminate by working closely with (or owning) a DAW team only makes sense. 

Bob

We will say it again. Steinberg’s system works with all hardware products even old analog synths connected via an interface.

So it is really Sonar=Roland and Steinberg=Yamaha+Roland, Korg, Nord, Moog, Kurzweil, Sequential, Buchla, , Casio .................. You get the picture.

I agree that this is Cakewalk’s issue, unless somehow Yamaha, or someone else, could make a non-VST3 plug to introduce the right amount of timing.

I don’t want to sound down on the Motif. I think that it is a great workstation, both in terms of sound and features.

Undoubtedly many, if not all, of the issues surrounding the manual integration of the Motif with other DAWs are solved in a fairly automated manner if you can use Cubase as your DAW. As for me, I just don’t have that option. I’m blind, and Sonar is the only DAW that has direct integration with my screen reading software. A new version of Pro Tools was recently released that works with screen readers, also, and I’ve been spending time with it, but the Motif integration is problematic in different ways with Pro Tools.

I use a DAW primarily for sequencing, rather than detailed audio editing, post production, etc. If I could use any DAW that I liked, I’d probably choose Cubase on Windows, or Logic on Mac, as both of those seem to be better organized for people that are primarily sequencing. Neither of them are accessible to me, though. So, in my case, I’m unable to switch. While not everyone is blind and dealing with a screen reader, others are working under limitations other than preference that keep them from using Cubase. I’m all for anything that simplifies the geekery of music gear, so think that the Cubase integration is great. I just wish that it were possible to get the integration working in a way that was a bit more universal.

The Motif is still worth having for lots of other reasons. I just hate that we miss out on many of the best reasons if we can’t use Cubase.

Brian, we know several high profile blind Motif users including Stevie Wonder who are using the Motif and Cubase with a screen reader so we will try to get some detailed info on how they have this set up.