decent description of mixfx here http://www.studio-one.expert/studio-one-blog//everything-you-want-to-know-about-presonus-studio-one-32

John
That wont work. With Mix FX things like saturation and noise apply to the buss as well as all the tracks feeding it. One wouldn't want that for EQ or compression. 

No, Mix FX isn't saturation or noise. It's a plugin interface sitting on some deeper level of the audio engine, that allows one plugin interacts with all tracks simultanous. The saturation and noise you mentioned is made by "Console Shaper", a plugin to Mix-FX. Using Mix-fx don't mean using Console-Shaper with saturation or noise.
 
I think Softube has made such an Mix-fx plugin for their Console-1 and this brings some better and easier integration to DAW as with normal track based vst plugins.
 
-Markus

I will chime in here to try and get things organized. I'm just about to really dig into the mixture of Sonar, V700, and control 1 at the same time. I made a huge change to the analog side of my studio and I'm still waiting on a ton (26 qty) of 8 channels snakes to show up, so I'm here rather than messing with my equipment.
 
The main difference between Control-1 with Studio One and Sonar is not really a problem, but a choice. The choice is, the volume control on the control-1 either adjusts the make up gain of the EQ (As it was originally designed and intended) or it actually controls the fader level of the track. (As the original poster desires). The other difference is the ability to map one of the dials to an Aux send. This boarders on the controller being used as a complete controller rather than a plug in specific controller. Let's say a person wants to control an Aux send with the Control-1. What knob should that be if all are already being used for the plugs? This again depends on integration between Softube and each DAW vender.
 
People that do not have a set of faders will desire the Control 1 to adjust the fader level. People who do have faders would rather it works as it was designed. Even then, if you are doing mainly boosts (typical under 10K hour mixing experience adjustments), you run the risk of track/EQ processing overload (clipping). I have my 10K hours in, but with outside the box systems. Very new to ITB mixing.
 
Really what I desired and in part by the original post person, is an expanded version of the Control 1 that includes 4 aux sends, fader control, and the ability to run two of them at once. Linking the two with a full featured transport and stereo controls. This would allow one to eq two tracks as the same time that are fighting for the same space, or both sides of a stereo track. MS, Blumen, and other Phase related Mic pair controls would also be nice. Once you get that far, the desire for a full set of faders is almost removed because it's faster to select the track and perform the adjustments from an ergonomic standpoint. Softtube did just enough to get people there at minimum cost as a great starting point. Once you allow a plug to be in control of solo, EQ. and comp, the rest of the stuff I bring up would be nice to also get into the package. So in general, I'm suggesting Softube make another box that has stereo, transport, mic, and aux controls that is intended to be used with two control-1's. I will now submit my suggestion to softube. In that fashion, the control-1 does not have to change at all, but add another product that ties everything together. That product can then be integrated with each DAW while leaving the control-1 alone. Products take time to design, plan, program, manufacture, produce, and distribute, and have to make money while everything is going on or we don't get it at all!
 
I also would rather have Sonar remove bugs and clean things up rather than add new bells and whistles. That stated, the hardware surfaces available for easy integration are limited. I'm not aware of any that use RJ-45 connections and are pre-programmed for Sonar. The Nucleus came close, but priced it out of the market by including converters and it does not come pre-programmed for Sonar. if it did, I would own one. I was also hoping for Sonar to work native on an MX4 card. Never gonna happen as that format is no longer being programmed for.

mdages

John
That wont work. With Mix FX things like saturation and noise apply to the buss as well as all the tracks feeding it. One wouldn't want that for EQ or compression. 

No, Mix FX isn't saturation or noise. It's a plugin interface sitting on some deeper level of the audio engine, that allows one plugin interacts with all tracks simultanous. The saturation and noise you mentioned is made by "Console Shaper", a plugin to Mix-FX. Using Mix-fx don't mean using Console-Shaper with saturation or noise.
 
I think Softube has made such an Mix-fx plugin for their Console-1 and this brings some better and easier integration to DAW as with normal track based vst plugins.
 
-Markus

I think you misunderstood me. Presently the only Mix FX is the Console Shaper which has saturation, noise and crosstalk. Those things will work as I pointed out on all tracks with one plugin on a buss they feed to. You don't want that same ability for a compressor or EQ. What you would get is tones of EQ and compression.  
 
I am under the impression that the Softtude Console 1 is a direct controller for its plugins. It makes it clear to me that you will want its plugins on each track you want to control with it. It does not use Mix Engine FX. 
 
 

Here is further information on the Console 1 from their web site.
 
The DAW connection 
When you first install Console 1 on your computer, a plug-in aptly named Console 1 appears in your DAW's plug-in folder. When this is inserted on a track, buss or aux channel, the sound is routed to the Console 1 mixer and back. So the DAW and Console 1 are separate systems, but they're connected by the Console 1 plug-in. In order to get control of your entire mix, we recommend that the Console 1 plug-in is inserted on all tracks, buses and aux channels of the DAW project.

subtlearts
...what are the odds that another one is going to turn a donkey into a unicorn?

Not much to add here..   I just liked the line above.   
 

backwoods
Pretty tough critique there Drone7 (in my opinion). Many people like Tassman products and if they don't they should take it up with Tassman. Apple includes the best rompler but it is still a distant placed competitor to Kontakt which I wthink most serious musicians would own.
 
Rather than spend money on VST instruments shouldnt Cakewalk (they make DAWs) just keep on keeping on the current tack-- improving stability, new features, bug fixes etc?
 
But I wouldn't be complaining if they threw in Omnisphere! (Apple did buy and monopolize Alchemy which was cruel to the rest of us but brilliant)

 Yep, Apple doesn't have the best rompler because it's not Omnisphere.  There's a few lame synths in Sonar but that doesn't make them any different than other DAWs.  Cyclone was ahead of it's time.  Beatscape should not have been trashed.  I like the Rapture Session.  BTW I was doodling around creating a song and wanted my strings to sound fake like from a synth and I was impressed with those Sound Center Strings on how well they sit in a mix.
 
 Most DAWs always have something for the first time user to create music.  Most advanced users aren't using the included instruments.  I know Studio One beefed up their rompler but most people are going to use something like Kontakt.  Even if you have the Live Suite most of that is still inferior to the Kontakt/Komplete offerings.  Even with Reason having rack extensions users are moving away from the packaged effects/instruments.
 
  I do like the Cakewalk's 3rd party collaborations with XLN and AAS. I've gotten some nice stuff for little money.  As for the DAW I like the direction it's going.  

You guys are over analyzing this :)
As I mentioned before all it is is bidirectional control. Its a simple vst extension that allows the plugin to set mixer values in the host. Nothing to do with "mix-fx" or other internal routing. 
We already support one part of this which is sending console-1 track data. We'll consider implementing the other part.

Well not all of us are "over analyzing" it. I think I gave the correct situation. 

At the end of the day what people really were hoping for with tighter Console 1 integration is that the track selector buttons on the Console 1 also select the corresponding track in the DAW. This would make it easier to navigate sessions.
 
At the moment we have a situation where you could select your kick drum track inside Console 1 while your DAW selected track is still the snare drum for instance. Not a catastrophe but not ideal.
 
If Cakewalk could make the integration happening that I was talking about above, folks like me could use their Faderport and Console 1 together, as the Faderport (and its motorized fader ;) ) would then follow the track selection on Console 1.
 
I wish Cakewalk all the best and hope for the future that this will work someday.
I think you guys can pull it off, your integration of Console 1 is already better than what we have between Pro Tools and Console 1.