Not many are going to use it in perfectly transparent mode and from another point of view it its great that it does offer a very perfect transparent mode too.
 
I think it sounds great though once you start getting into it and using all its built in features plus their plugs plus your own plugs too.  I love the standard EQ on the tracks and it different to the buss eq which is different again from the stereo mix eq. The 32C EQ  is really nice too on the channels.
 
The saturation is very cool also and once you get a handle on it and dialling it in, it can be very effective.  There is a very nice overall sound to this DAW.  Also you will get more of its sound too when you mix more of its sounds in it e.g. tracks.  Not stems..  Which now takes you to you might as well track in it as well.  Which you can of course.  It has more advanced midi features.  For me midi is important as I run a large external setup as well.  Always have.  Studio One is better in this department for now. Cubase and Logic better still.
 
Their plugins are very nice and have a real nice sound to them too.  Especially their mastering plugs.  I have got a fair range of them now and like them.  Reverbs and all.  I like the way the multi band mastering compressor can limit the amount of gain reduction in each band.  That makes for a very punchy and dynamic sounding mastering compressor. The way you draw eq curves in the mastering eq is something else as well.
 
Plus it is laid out like a traditional mixer/multitrack tape machine layout which some may prefer and even love.  I taught sound engineering on a Harrison console for a few years so I feel at home with it.  The metering is good as well.  Plus the channel dynamics processors, every channel having dynamic control at your fingertips. 

sharke
.... I just think that if people are buying Mixbus just for its purported summing magic, they're quite possibly being conned. 

Too much... Magic bus!
(I waaant it... I want it I want it I waaant it!)

Sorry, couldn't resist...

I bought it for $29 because why not. Will give it a whirl. I agree with many of your misgivings. If it's so subtle that it passes a null test, then it's down to confirmation bias. Which is very subtle indeed. Like, nonexistent subtle. But, so it goes. The human brain is like that.

For $29, all I need is ONE good use case. Doesn't need to be my main DAW.

I think the price makes it worthwhile even if the hype is overblown.  I never use mine, but one of these days....

$79 is incredible for a pro-level DAW that seems to get good reviews everywhere, but $29 was like a sore p**ker (you just can't beat it), so I pulled the trigger.

Who cares if it has any magic voodoo or not. Digital audio is digital audio. Just playing with it last night, it looks like it will be real simple to operate. The fact that it has EQ and compression on every channel (not to mention the price!) is what sold me; that's what attracted me to SONAR's ProChannel so much.

I don't think I have ever encountered that colorful phrase.

Hi,
Well I dived into the Harrison's software ,
A very nice looking and in some ways quite intuitive as far as you don't want to go too deep in the settings .
It seems it is possible to make up things with it though it is quite demanding on the CPU as soon as you don't know exactly what you want to do ( meaning inserting a reverb on a synth to check how it sounds or trying differents sample rates,all this can work but I have had to mess around with buffers and the properties are far away to be as easy to set up as they are in Sonar)
It looks like a usable software with strength and weakness but I have to admit Sonar was somewhat an accomplished product even if ,from my point of view,I did not like having to download updates every month...
Lots of appealing offers from music software brands by now just telling you:" spend monney and come to my side.." .
Reaper seems also appealing but I do not know why ,something lets me keep away from properly going along with it.
Just to get back to this Mixbus thread,according to me ,the interface is quite appealing ,having everything available in a strip ( like Sonar's Pro-channel) makes decisions easier but I don't know if you can manage a project from start to end with Mixbus when it comes to inserting lot of Vst's and having to do deep editing.
......

I wouldn't trust a null test as an absolute test. There are other factors of "sound quality" that will not perfectly null - nor will be of sufficient volume to hear in isolation when it is perfectly null-ed. Think of subtle differences in driver materials and amp circuits in monitors /headphones, converter tolerances, cable resistance and capacitance differences between left and right paths. It's a fun excersize - but I wouldn't base the quality of software code on a null test. I've tried Mixbuss and I trust my ears and my ego enough to know that it does impart a quality of sound that is different - so does Samplitude for that matter - so does an ADAT. It may in a way that they interpret panning laws or how data streams are interleaved and summed. Maybe Mixbuss models crosstalk in a subtle way, I really don't know but it's the sum of the parts that make a good DAW.
 
To me Sonar has the best mix of workflow features and stability for the styles of music I create. I like the sound of Mixbuss better, Samplitude is crazy configurable and very deep in audio manipulation and sounds great but- it's PIA to keep track of so much crap. Reaper is a nightmare for me to work with. Studio one intrigued me when it first came out - but couldn't do basic functions as efficiently as Sonar.

Not sure I agree with other sound qualities alluding the null test.  Here is a little experiment I did.  I ran a Steely Dan track through my Nomad Pultec EQ.  I set no boost or cuts anywhere. Left everything totally flat. Even set it for modern instead of vintage etc..Rendered it out.
 
Placed it against the original track unprocessed. When you switched back and forth the sound coming from both tracks was identical. It was impossible to tell.  Performed the null test and did NOT get a perfect null.  Most of the signal was gone only highs left but could not cancel them out no matter how finely I tuned levels etc..They were low level too but you could hear the easily.
 
Mixbus with no saturation or EQ anywhere sounds exactly like everything else.  It is not imparting any form of magic. I do agree it can sound good but only when you start engaging everything else.
 
Samplitude would be no different if I summed the mixes I did before in the other 4 DAW's I bet I could null it perfectly with everything else. Even the slightest imperceptible change in a sound will prevent a null from happening.  If I did a blind AB test with a mix being summed in Samplitude and say another DAW Rbh would have difficulty in picking them.  It was only those old analog multi tracks that all sounded different and believe me they did.  Does not happen so much in the digital world.  One of the great things about it.  Its consistency across the board. Summing wise I mean of course. 
 
Forget about deciding on Mixbus for its sound.  Choose it for everything else.  Its layout, design, GUI etc..  Workflow...Ease of use.  It is also perfectly stable on my system as well.