Aux vs. Bus ???

I'm having a hard time comprehending the use of the new Aux track feature in Splat. Signal chain stuff usually makes my brain hurt, so I try to keep it simple. For the most part, I output my tracks to busses for processing. For instance, I'll output all my lead vox tracks to a Lead Vox Bus with Prochannel plugins, reverbs, etc, then output that bus to the master bus. Very standard, and easy to control multiple tracks with one fader........right.
 
So, my question is......why would I use an Aux track. The applications in the JP e-zine don't really clarify anything for me. Can someone provide some real world SIMPLE examples for using an aux track instead of a bus? And explain the difference between the two......
 
Thanks guys.
 
~Jeff

It just allows for a similar workflow to other DAWs where instead of the separate bus pane we have had for many years you can put those "busses" anywhere you want. So now you can work exclusively in the Track Pane (using Aux Tracks as your busses) and then the only bus you have in the Bus pane is your Master (but I'm guessing that could be bypassed too).
 
A real world application...
 
I often record into two tracks from my dual output amplifier. I used to have to create a bus in the bus pane if I wanted a single control for those two tracks. Now I can send those two outputs to an aux track instead, get the levels/effects I want on those individual outputs, hide the original tracks I recorded into and only have one track to adjust in the track pane instead of two/needing to move to the bus pane to adjust the bus.
 
Or you can do that with drums...
 
Or you can keep a parallel compression bus for a track right next to the track feeding it...
 
Or you can record multiple tracks into an aux track (you cannot record into Sonar busses) for quick sub mixes or test mixes (instead of having to export)...
 
Bunch of other possibilities too but really it's not introducing any new functionality. It's just making a whole pile of things easier/more flexible.
 
Hopefully that makes sense. Kind of spaced out today.
 
Cheers.

In a real world we used to work with large consoles that looked like they were made of knobs and buttons.
 

AUX sends were used mainly for parallel processing, while buses were used to group channels. Well, you could use AUX sends with buses for signal processing and route AUX sends as outputs, but that was a less common scenario. Nowadays compact and powerful digital mixers replaced huge and bulky mixing desks. Of course, with digital mixers and audio workstations the possibilities are almost endless, there are many creative ways to use different tracks and their combinations, but the basic idea still applies:
AUX - parallel processing
Bus - group tracks.
Hope that helps.

I've discovered one drawback to using Aux Tracks as busses in that if you have sends on tracks that are sent to the Aux Track and pull the fader down on the Aux you can still hear the sends return (they are set to Post Fader). On a bus pulling down the fader aslo pulls the send level down with the bus. This has been a bit of a bummer. Has anyone else found this to be true?

ampfixer
IF I were recording a drum kit live then I see aux tracks being great. Multiple snare mikes could go to an aux as could multiple kick mikes or room mikes. Then I'd take all the aux drum tracks and route them to a drum buss for final polish. This would allow for a lot of tweaking. 

I have not used them yet, apart from just to experiment, but I really like ^this^ application.