Track Busser. 
 
Bus Stop.

Andrey, the name shown in the context menu would be that of the destination "track bus", not the source track. So it would instead show something like "Sidechain Mixer (Input 2)-Guitar Track Bus" (depending on what you called the "track bus"). So you might have something like:
 
Guitar Track 1 -> Sidechain Mixer (Input 2)-Guitar Bus 1
Guitar Track 2 -> Sidechain Mixer (Input 2)-Guitar Bus 1
Guitar Track 3 -> Sidechain Mixer (Input 2)-Guitar Bus 2
Guitar Track 4 -> Sidechain Mixer (Input 2)-Guitar Bus 2
Guitar Track 5 -> Sidechain Mixer (Input 2)-Guitar Bus 2
 
Am I missing what you mean?

Silktone, now I get it, I was not being clear enough, sorry for that. What I meant was not summing several tracks in one track bus but rather the opposite - I was talking about distributing one track via sends into several "track buses". And only then summing the whole thing up. Think of it like this:
 
Guitar Track 1 send -> Sidechain Mixer(Input 2)-Guitar 1 Subtrack A 
Guitar Track 1 send -> Sidechain Mixer(Input 2)-Guitar 1 Subtrack B 
Guitar Track 1 send -> Sidechain Mixer(Input 2)-Guitar 1 Subtrack C
Guitar 1 all the Subtracks output -> Sidechain Mixer(Input 2)-Guitar 1 SumABC
et cetera.
 
That's why I thought different dll names could come in handy. So this would be something like:
Guitar Track 1 send -> Sidechain A(Input 2)-Guitar 1 Subtrack
Guitar Track 1 send -> Sidechain B(Input 2)-Guitar 1 Subtrack
...
 
But, again, since you mentioned it, I think it's really unnecessary. I take it back.
 

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
We'll think about doing track to track routing. Its been on the plate for a few years but there have been other more features that took precedence. Our architecture already supports this since internally tracks are really just a superset of buses as far as the engine goes. Buses already allow you to send to other buses so allowing tracks to send to tracks will be an extension of the same thing.
Some UI changes would be required to accommodate this. I imagine we wouldn't want to always show tracks as destinations since it would clutter the UI for the normal use case since this is a far less common requirement.

It would be important that the routing be accomplished via the input of the destination track (or some means other than the source track output).  IOW, we would need both the source track and the destination track able to be sent to a bus or main outs via the track output.

microapp

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Its not quite as simple as you might imagine. Buses and tracks in the UI are vastly different entities and the UI that manages them is quite different. This is because tracks existed eon's before buses did in SONAR. Changing that logic would take a lot of re-architecture of the UI, so it would be hard to justify the cost.

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
If we did it the concept of an aux track would be much more feasible than trying to mix buses into the track view. Buses and tracks have two different functions. Buses are for mixing/post-processing as opposed to tracks that have input data. I personally find mixing tracks and buses in the same view a schizophrenic concept. I understand the requirement to pair the UI but it seems like a huge investment for a minor gain.
Another possibility (thinking aloud) what if we had an auto track zoom mode that magnified and showed the track and its destinations when you clicked the track. Would that be helpful?

I guess there would be no point in requesting MIDI buses then.
What would that be... a paranoid concept ?

I'm trying to see the purpose of this. I can't. It would be like having a type 0 MIDI file.  

Holy crap that's awesome. I can't wait to try this out SilkTone. I may be more excited about this than I am for the new version of Sonar...
 
Thank you,
 
Dean

One weird thing I noticed...
 
I wasn't sure what the plugin will do with mono tracks, so I played around with the track interleave buttons. If the 1st track going into the plugin is mono, all subsequent tracks will be treated as mono (???). However if any of the non-first track is mono, then you get the expected behavior.
 
Maybe Noel knows why it is acting this way. I don't think it is a big deal as it is easy to make sure at least the very 1st track is stereo.

Mod Bod

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
I understand the request but why is it important? :)

Parallel processing.

I may be missing out something, but won't be the current bus-routing manner with pre/post-fader sends more natural for parallel processing? After all, it would be nice to have send amounts on one source track (and automate them on that very track) than to have to hunt input gains on the receiving tracks.

Well there you have it, ladies and gentlemen.  A solution to the need of the few.  
 
I took three guitar tracks, set them for stereo interleave and routed them via post fader sends to another track that had Sidechain Mixer in the first slot of the FX bin.  I switched the output on the source tracks to NONE and set the destination track's output to my ALL GUITARS bus and I could control the overall volume of the Electric guitars with the new destination track Electric Guitar Mix.  I could blend the individual guitars via the track fader or the send levels.  Of course my preference is the track fader.
 
I also verified that if I set the output of the source track and the output of the destination track to the same bus, I get a parallel copy.  I confirmed to myself that another FX added to the bin after Sidchain Mixer would work properly and it did.  I placed Channel Tools in the Electric Guitar Mix and flipped the polarity on the channels and as I adjusted the fader on the EG Mix, the source track and the destination track started to cancel.  I never got a full cancellation because I didn't match the levels as they should be but I didn't hear any change in tone as the two tracks started to cancel and that gave me confidence that there is no phase issues.  At least I didn't hear any.
 
I did get some phase issues when I engaged a second effect in the parallel tracks FX bin but it mysteriously went away after I started looking for the cause.  I'm thinking it was a temporary ADC issue and when I restarted the audio engine, it synced back up properly.
 
Good job, Silk Tone. 
 
EDIT:  Just for giggles, I tried arming record mode and recording to the destination track.  As expected, no recording.  No, Freeze doesn't work either.  

Mod Bod

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
I understand the request but why is it important? :)

Parallel processing.

I was referring to this statement "It would be important that the routing be accomplished via the input of the destination track (or some means other than the source track output)." 
 
Why is it important to you that routing is accomplished via the input rather than the output as it is today for sends to buses. I woudn't want to change the UI paradigm just for this.

AndreyB

Mod Bod

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
I understand the request but why is it important? :)

Parallel processing.

I may be missing out something, but won't be the current bus-routing manner with pre/post-fader sends more natural for parallel processing? After all, it would be nice to have send amounts on one source track (and automate them on that very track) than to have to hunt input gains on the receiving tracks.

Exactly. If we did it it would follow the same paradigm as sends today.

SilkTone, you are a prince among Sonarites.
I just took two snare tracks (top and bottom mic), EQ'd each of them, sent them via your plugin to a track next to them called snare, compressed and added a bit of reverb to that track, and then hid the top and bottom snare mic tracks so I only had one track called "snare" (natch). Now if I feel like going back and changing relative mic levels or EQ I'll just un-hide, adjust, and re-hide, and all the rest of the time I just have a single track called "Snare" to work with. It get sent to the "Drum" bus, which is in the bus section just like god intended.
Yay. If you ever stop through my neck of the woods look me up. I owe you a beer or six.
Thanks again,
Dean
 
 
EDIT: Oh, I forgot to mention, another way around the mute/solo thing aside from folders is to group the mute and solo buttons. Works great.

Thank you Steven (Silktone)!!
 
Going to DL, install and give this a try.
 
Thanks again!

Tried. Works. Simple. Don't know if I'll have a ton of use for it, but it certainly does what it says on the tin! Simple is good.