How to send a track to another track on sonar X3

Not in real time. The way to get the processed output of a track "printed" to another track in SONAR is to bounce it. There are very few situations in which this won't suffice; what are you trying to accomplish?
 
 

I can't think of a use case where this would be essential. If you want to process a track with another track, you can simply feed it to a bus. Once you have the processing the way you want, bounce it. Or drag the audio to another track and do the same thing.

How is real time mix down to a track faster than fast bounce?

SONAR has live bounce capabilities if desired.

Jeff Evans
Just because Craig you cannot think of an application, does not mean it does not exist. It is a bit like clip gain changes actually changing waveforms. It IS handy and useful and fast.  And so is this too.  Faster. 

 
I didn't say an application, I said a use case where this would be essential. I come up with applications all the time that don't have an essential use case
 
One is where a virtual synth may actually do something different every time you use it in real time. eg either driven from a pre recorded midi part or you fiddling with it live as it plays.
 
If you're fiddling with it, you can record those automation moves. If it does something different every time it plays, you don't know what it's done until you've recorded it...and if you bounced it, you wouldn't know what it did until the bounce was over. So I guess the advantage of recording it is if you didn't like what you heard, you could stop immediately and start over rather than wait for a bounce to complete. Personally, if it did something different each time I might or might not like, I'd just bounce it five times and splice together the best bits.
 

Another is where you might actually be mixing and making moves over some tracks or buses live while a mix is going down. It's handy to be able to route the main stereo buss back to a track as well.  You should be putting some human element into your mix ie making moves. It always sounds better to me.  It sounds better than sitting back and letting the computer do all the work.

So as I understand it, what you're saying is that you want to be able to record the real-time changes rather than audition the real-time changes and after getting it the way you like, bouncing. I can see that as a valid application, but for me, I still don't see it as essential because you can still make real-time changes and have them recorded in individual tracks, buses, and the master bus. What you describe is more immediate in the sense that if you like it, it has already been recorded rather than still needing to be bounced. Then again, if I did record something in real time, I'd still want to listen back to it to make sure that what "seemed like a good idea at the time" sounded good when listened to objectively. I don't need to do that if I've already had the chance to listen to something objectively, which is what happens before the bounce. To each his own...to me it seems like six of one, half a dozen of the other but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise if I'm missing something.
 
Wasn't it George Carlin who said something along the lines of "Some say the glass is half-full, some say it's half-empty. I say they need a different-sized glass."
 
 

Jeff you said it unless I misunderstood you.  "It IS handy and useful and fast. And so is this too. Faster." There is nothing fast about real time anything.
 
 

John I would not be altering much during the recording process either if it were incoming audio signals. In terms of recording I am only referring to manipulating virtual instruments mainly only. Something I realise many don't necessarily do. (including me too) Craig this is still way faster than recording a whole lot of automation moves as well on a virtual synth. Slow.  Many times I can just grab some parameters of a virtual synth and get exactly what I want to hear in one pass! Nothing beats that. For example in one pass I might tweak 5 parameters on the fly.
 
The speed comes in when if you are doing a mixdown and you make the right moves (especially if you are very good at making moves!) then it's done and dusted right at the point. Nothing faster than that either!  Checking it is not always necessary either.  I can usually tell if the live moves have worked out fine as I am doing it.  Of course if I screw it up then I stop and go back and start again.  I am talking pressure situations too where many are not under.
 
It is a bit like the waveform in clip gain changes thing too. It is faster, period. Other DAW's are offering these features (track routing) so there is something in it. Lots of people have asked for it and many DAW's have provided it that is all.  It is not a useless feature. Just like the clip gain waveform changes. Not useless, but very useful.
 
I may be silly on this but I just feel when human intervention has occurred in a real time mixdown it sounds better for some reason. Placebo effect maybe considering I was the one that did it! There are few serious Melbourne engineers around here that actually agree with me that one too.  Controlling a mix live with a control surface is fine too.  Actually you will probably find if you talk to the best mix engineers on the planet they will all the same thing. They don't automate the whole thing and sit back. That is a bit lazy in my opinion.  They actually move faders on mixdown.
 
Also I certainly do automate lots too, I just leave a handful of important things for live tweaking. eg vocals. There is just something about human touch on the faders (vocals especially) as the song progresses that is hard to replace for me that is all.
 

Jeff Evans
I did not think at first it would be useful either but once you have used it then it all changes.
 

+1000

...wicked
Yeah but I bet if you went back and offered Alan Parsons and Pink Floyd some automation for their mixing project they would've jumped at it. And continued talking about how much time they saved while at the pub drinking instead of doing take 237 of the "Money" mixdown.
 

Yes and they would have jumpd at it too I agree except they would have automated 90% of it and used manual control for the rest. You are thinking a bit black and white.  It does not have to be all one way or the other. Why not some of both.  Same as mixing all on an analog console or all digital ITB. What is great about today is we can have a large chunk of the mix ITB but some parts of it featuring some nice analog processing.

Jeff Evans

Sylvan
SONAR has live bounce capabilities if desired.

Yes but can you make changes along the way.  I think you may find you can't.  Not sure with Sonar of course but with Studio One if I ask it to do a real time bounce it does it fine in real time except you cannot change anything or make any moves along the way.  They lock you out!  This is where the buss to track feature comes into its own because you can then.
 
 

Just select the "live input" option in the bounce dialogue.
 
HTH

southpaw3473
You can't change fader settings, etc during live input bounce. Just tried it.

I wouldn't expect it to. I assumed as Jeff was referring to "analog processing" he was referring to external gear. FOr anything in the box there's always automation.

Perception I guess then. I've always assumed "live input" to refer to anything coming in from OTB, as opposed to stuff ITB.
 
For example, I wouldn't expect to record notes clicked in the PRV note pane but I would expect notes played on one of my controllers to be recorded.