Jeff Evans
What I meant was send tracks to the buss and then route the buss to the master.  So in the end the tracks end up on the master but have to go through the buses first.  That is how I do it in Studio One anyway. 

Yes, we're saying the same thing. That's what I do in SONAR and that's what I do in 32C.

I'm glad I waited a few months to upgrade to v4. Fifty bucks cheaper!

bapu

Jeff Evans
I am not sure there is some huge magic mojo going on after all with Mixbus or M32C for that matter.  
 
Harrison is more about the workflow, the GUI and the processing built into the channels, buses and the stereo buss. Plus their plugins which are excellent of course. 

I find that I get less mojo if I only use buses for fx and route most/all track straight to the master.
 
IOW the buses are where the mojo is IMO.

Well, that would be an interesting one to go after ... to see if / how much differences the buses do make. FWIW it's called Mixbus afterall ;-)
 
So, Jeff, if you find time for this, I'd be really interested in what your observations are!
 
The other - totally subjective but interesting - comparison would be to take Sonar or Studio One, reset "the desk" and mix for a short limited time period (e.g. one hour max, probably less). Knowing the mix you want to get using your well recorded drum material it should be possible to get a relatively good mix quickly. Then likewise on Mixbus 32C, same time limit. Then compare what it took to get there (e.g. how many tweaks in which places) and how happy you are with the results.
 
IMHO that's where musically well designed EQs, sat, comp should play in your favour and where differences in summing should make a difference if they indeed exist.
 
I know that this gives you two mixes that won't null by any means, but personally I'd be more interested in the subjective feedback of a very experienced person (who is not paid for biased advertising-like feedback) rather than if all the 1s and 0s add up to the same thing.