I was just wondering if I can record vst plugin into motif xf
I don’t want to record vst in cubase I want to use motif xf patern track to have a vst plug in on tracks
Is there a way to do this on the motif xf I have fire wire I want to record midi and audio plug in into motif xf

Can someone guide me in the right direction

You can use the Motif to play a VST inside Cubase (or other DAW) but the audio still comes from the computer, not the Motif.

If you are sequencing and you have sample RAM in your Motif, you can record (and save) the audio coming out of Cubase as a sample voice inside the sequence. That way you can be free of the computer after recording.

Let us know exactly what you are trying to accomplish and we can walk you through the steps to take.

Further to the information provided above, if I was to try and point you in the right direction I would suggest it would be to your advantage to consider using Cubase when you wish to sequence and use VSTi(s) and effects. While your workstation has its good points, especially when it comes to portability, in all honesty it is not designed to replace Cubase (and vice versa). It’s also a lot easier to work on a larger computer screen and one can accomplish far more in Cubase when it involves sequencing, recording and producing music than one can hope to achieve with any workstation. So do consider what you wish to accomplish and then consider which option works best for the purpose. In this case, it appears that Cubase is your answer. HTH............frank

Recording VSTi from the computer to a Motif XF via FW is built-into the design concept. Taking the magic of the studio with you on the road, to the gig, without having to bring the computer is actually a desirable thing for many of us (although unthinkable to some) it is actually desirable to have the flexibility to use whatever synthesizer sounds you wish in a composition in your Motif XF. 

Part of the original “Motif” design concept - the whole thing of “integrating” a sampler into the sequencer - had this in mind. It allows the player/composer to bring in other instruments, be they actual acoustic instruments or virtual synthesizers. The Motif XF mixer has 16 internal PARTS, plus two audio PARTS (a stereo or mono analog input and a stereo digital input).

So bringing in audio (analog or digital) is not only possible but easily accessible.

The Sampler can accept input from the “A/D INPUT”, the “FW” input, or it can be set to “Resample” (combination of all available sources). When you want to record VSTi’s or any audio from your computer DAW to the XF, you simply route that audio on the FW bus returning to the Motif XF internal mixer. There are 3 pairs of stereo returns from the DAW to the XF:
“Main L/R” = goes to the main L/R outputs (back panel)
“FW L/R” = goes to the internal XF mixer/sampler
“Assignable L/R” = goes to the assignable L/R output (back panel)

Routing VSTi from Cubase to the XF is easy:
Go to DEVICES > VST CONNECTIONS > OUTPUT Tab
Create a second STEREO OUTPUT by clicking “ADD BUS”, create 1 Stereo Bus.
Assign this second Stereo Bus:
AUDIO DEVCE = Yamaha Steinberg FW ASIO
DEVICE PORT = “Motif XF FW L” and “Motif XF FW R”

When you launch your VSTi, you want to route the VST INSTRUMENT audio lane’s output to “Stereo Output 2”. This will send it to the Motif XF via FW where it can be routed to the Integrated Sampling Sequencer.

By isolating the VSTi’s audio on its own bus, you setup to sample data coming in via “FW”.

Depending on how you want to work, you can record your data as MIDI first (do your editing, etc)  then transfer the audio when you have perfected it, or you can setup to record directly into the Motif XF’s Integrated Sampling Sequencer “live”. Both are available.

You can fully automate the recording (sampling) - setting punch-in and punch-out points, etc. Each track you designate for audio samples can hold a maximum 128 individual takes!  

Once the audio is transferred to the XF, you can apply Motif XF effects to it - you do so by using the new VOICE CONVERT feature that allows you to immediately convert a recording into a Motif XF Voice (this gives it access to the EQ, Insertion Effects, Filters, etc., of the XF Voice architecture)

Summary: 
So not only can VSTi be recorded to the Motif XF sequencer, any type of external source you can dream up… The XF comes with 128MB of SDRAM which can be used for the Integrated Sampling Sequencer.  Audio data once sampled can be installed on to FLASH Boards which makes your audio tracks always available. And to finally be free of the (quirky) computer - is worth every effort!

An excellent description of how to use the workstation to its full potential, BM. This should be a sticky, and I’m sure those folks who wish to do that sort of thing will find this information very useful.

To the OP, who doesn’t appear to have returned to this thread yet, you now have suggestions covering two different approaches, and so you can choose whichever one meets your needs...whatever they may be. You have Cubase and a computer for studio recording, and for those who enjoy tiny screens and pushing buttons :) you are now aware of the capabilities of your workstation. IMHO, there’s really no right and wrong here; both approaches have their merits. It all depends on what you wish to do, why you wish to do it, and what you hope to achieve........frank

To the OP, who doesn’t appear to have returned to this thread yet, you now have suggestions covering two different approaches, and so you can choose whichever one meets your needs...whatever they may be. You have Cubase and a computer for studio recording, and for those who enjoy tiny screens and pushing buttons :) you are now aware of the capabilities of your workstation. IMHO, there’s really no right and wrong here; both approaches have their merits. It all depends on what you wish to do, why you wish to do it, and what you hope to achieve

I think you took the original poster’s question as an either/or (Xf versus Cubase) workflow issue, I choose just to answer the question - not question why they wanted to record the VSTi to the PATTERN mode of their workstation. I don’t see (as you apparently do) that the two are at all at odds, working with hardware and software, to me brings the best of both worlds. And is actually a design initiative of Yamaha and Steinberg. And certainly not how I saw the question at all. I think I just read the question differently than you did - is all.

When working with just the internal sequencer I can use the computer Editor if I don’t “enjoy tiny screens” - but actually when working with music “the screen” is the least of my concern. There are times when recording and then taking the music with you IS exactly what you want to do - leaving that bulky computer at home. And since moving data between the XF and Cubase is not only possible but accounted for in the design, why not use it? And particularly as this is part of the XF’s design with FW.

Hi BM,
Not sure if an explanation re. my replies above is really necessary here, since I suspect you already know what I’m going to say, :) but I will respond briefly to your comments. You did specifically answer the original question directly, as I expected you would, and I did interpret that question the same way that you did. However, you also understand why I prefer to avoid discussing Yamaha workstations directly on this forum, so all I could do in this thread was to suggest an alternative approach to consider. My options trying to help here were limited by my reluctance to get into the workings of a Yamaha product, not by my ability to understand the question. :) I was not being deliberately obtuse either, nor do I see anything at “odds” here. I suggest that’s a misinterpretation of what I actually wrote.

At present neither you nor I know what lay behind the question, such as does the OP prefer or have to use a workstation, or was he/she simply unaware that they are alternatives to consider as well? You did indeed provide specific answers to the specific question; I simply suggested an alternative approach. After all, this is the “Steinberg” conference, so I would assume that suggesting that using Cubase in some instances may be preferable should not be surprising to those who post here. :) Anyway hope that offers a brief explanation of why I wrote what I did. Cheers............frank