It's often useful to have more than one EQ on a track. For example, one before a compressor and one after.
 
Obviously, it's easy enough to achieve this with other EQ VSTs in the FX bin or an FX Chain module, but you know, the Quad Curve is really good and simple and flexible, and it would be nice to be able to use it in those cases.

+1
 
Even a "Quad Curve Junior" with just HP and LP would work OK, at least the majority of the time (for me).
 

For my purposes, I'd usually need the full thing. But actually, a simple filter module would be a good Pro Channel addition in itself.
 

Yeah I like this idea. TBH it's strange we can't already given that we can with just about every other PC module.

FastBikerBoy
I fail to see what's wrong with the current set up. The PC is there for those who want to use it, and the FX bin is there for those that want that. Or a combination of both of course.

(from http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/3123977 )
 
ProChannel in its current definition is the "next version" of "Effects", so has one EQ and one Compressor. You disagree with an idea to call in FX bin, but support an idea to make it FX bin
 

I would also add that I would like to be able to remove the quadcurve from the channel if I'm not using it.

azslow3

FastBikerBoy
I fail to see what's wrong with the current set up. The PC is there for those who want to use it, and the FX bin is there for those that want that. Or a combination of both of course.

(from http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/3123977 )
 
ProChannel in its current definition is the "next version" of "Effects", so has one EQ and one Compressor. You disagree with an idea to call in FX bin, but support an idea to make it FX bin
 

 
Eh? What has adding more than one PC EQ to the PC got to do with the FX bin? In addition my earlier post on FX bin wasn't a "disagree"  I can't see what is wrong with having both. That is still valid. Either are there to use as a user sees fit. I use both although the PC is my first preference. 
 
I'd like to add a second EQ module to it though.

FastBikerBoy
Eh? What has adding more than one PC EQ to the PC got to do with the FX bin?
...
I'd like to add a second EQ module to it though.

There is always one (and only one) PC EQ because PC is not FX bin (yet) but old "effect" bin (by definition of the last one). In case EQ can be removed or duplicated, PC will be technically speaking FX bin with extra GUI support.
 
What I want to say is that either we ask for full freedom in PC (the same way it is in FX now) or we ask to keep things as they are (PC is effect, FX bin is different). These approaches are (logically) mutually exclusive...

Yes but my point is - so what if there are two FX bins one of which has a different GUI?
 
A user can ignore either or both or use either or both. Both can be hidden if they are not needed. Removing one just takes away a choice and undoubtedly a preferred workflow for someone.
 
I'll have no problem with the FX bin being removed, I prefer using the PC because its focus stays with the current track. I just don't see the need to do that. What would it achieve? What bothers you so much about both being there? 

I do not bother at all... I have just got an idea that there is a small step to merge them to get the best from two worlds.
 
2 FX bins, apart from confusion and endless "(why) are you (not) using PC?" discussions, only create artificial difference, preventing smooth transfer from one to another. Difficulties in combining both and long standing bugs in ProChannel related Control Surface API are 2 additional reasons why I prefer to see just one "Insert bin".