The PC Modules are great.

That being said, the PC doesn't have a "sound" per se...the MODULES
have "sound"

The PC is really nothing more then a glorified "effects" bin.  So to sit back
and "praise the glory of" is kinda silly...don't freak..just my opinion...

The Quad Curve is what gives "sound" without any modules being inserted,
AND it's NOT removable.   You CAN turn it off, but you can't get rid of it in
favor of another EQ, it's ALWAYS in the signal chain.

I LOVE the PC Modules...they are quite awesome.  But, alas, I'm a realist
and will "pop" any bubble that is "pseudo"

Where Cake has REALLY, REALLY, REALLY dropped the ball here is in NOT
giving us an ONSLAUGHT of PC Modules to take the money that we spend
on OTHER 3rd Party Plugins.

The LAST PC Module we got was an "Updated to VST" PC-2A....and when
was that?  DUH!!!

Personally, I would like to be able to "delete" the Quad Curve and use
what ever EQ I would choose to use, or have Cake give us MORE EQ
choices...but...as I said...what do I know.

I know I shall suffer the WRATH OF THE CAKE-ITES for this post....but
no one ever said the truth was pretty....just pretty real.

John
Your truth not the truth.  No one said it was the PC itself that was sounding so great. Which seems rather obvious. You can use any EQ you want nothing is stopping you. Oh you don't want the built in EQ to be there. I see, get X2 Studio. Either way it wont interfere with anything if you don't activate it.

WRATH OF THE CAKE-ITES

The OP states, and I QUOTE "Pro Channel and it's UNIQUE sound"  End of story...bye bye..
I think you missed the entire point of my post....sorry to offend you ...

And the Quad Curve EQ loads into memory when you open X2...even if it's turned off...so it's STILL occupying
memory space...even when bypassed.  THAT was my point.

I think most right thinking people understood what the OP meant by the sound of the ProChannel.
 
If the minute amount of memory that the QuadCurve EQ takes up when switched off causes anyone a problem, then it is probably time to upgrade your memory.  I always try to leave myself some headroom.
 
I also would like some more modules - can I request a Pultec emulation again?
 
 
 

jb101
I've not used the PC presets in X2, I must get round to giving them a look.  I've often learnt a lot by looking at well designed presets.

Jb101 - another thing I highly recommend is experimenting by adding to any of your tracks on the ProChannel one or more of the Included FX Chains. There are some even grouped under a ProChannel category from the Browser. Really sweet stuff. You can find the ProChannel goes way farther than expected when inserting some of those.

PC is awesome.  Recorded some vocals recently..... needed to cut some low frequencies..... BOOM.  Done.  Five seconds.  Amazing. 

backwoods
Concrete Limiter is far better than the channel strip limiter in Nuendo so I have to disagree with you there vespesian. And the compressors in PoChannel are very good, you just have to have the ability to operate them- same as the SSL Duende Channel strip- you have to use your ears..... If you need a "finely grained control system" for a transient designer load up the percussion strip or the Studio Devil transient designer. Both those are better than the Nuendo Channel transient effect- which itself needs a more finely grained control system right 

Actually, C7 comes with 3 different limiters in the channel strip - standard, maximizer and brickwall -, unlike X2, but i've no clue about Nuendo, that's not my issue.  I was referring to the gate in mentioning a better control system, not a transient designer. BTW - I "have the ability" to employ compressors, but still find the PC items fall apart with bass & hi heavy material, way before they should. 
 

 
 

backwoods
Fine... use the sontius gate, which unlike the cubendo channel gate has fine grained controls orwhatever. Or use the percussion strip gate in the pro channel as an fx strip.
 
Do you think the stock Cubase compressors do a better job on bass and "hi heavy" material as compared to Sonar? 

Well, now that you brought it up, yes, I do actually. And I didn't have to pay extra for them. Ever (remember "expanded"...?).

backwoods
OK. Agree Sonar should have a Pro Channel transient designer ( and a much better one than the nuendo channel strip td hopefully). Disagree with everything else you say. How to you find the steinberg channel gate Fully operational and highly tweakable and better sounding too I presume. 
 
 

 I'm sorry - but i have no idea what you're talking about. I'm wasn't talking about a "transient designer" (ever), i was mentioning the PC gate. I find the PC gate to be clumsy and difficult to fine tune. And, yes, I like the c7 channel strip better, esp. the tube comp. I also like how the EQ can be plotted/mapped, in a number of different ways. Very convenient. Are we good?

I find the PC modules pretty good and I use them all the time.
Cake def needs to come out with a some new ones, though ...or partner with some 3rd party guys like they did with Overloud.  

is it something that works on hi heavy material ? Maybe I should post on the Steinberg forum with links to Sonar or something.

Good man Jeff, been trying to figure out what the follower on reasons pulveriser is all about, and you have just nailed it, cheers (too lazy to go read up on it, thought i'd figure it out my self lol)

Hey Chris. Pulveriser seems to do many things as quoted here from their website:
 
Pulveriser Demolition Pulveriser brings together crunchy compression, dirty distortion, a multimode filter and flexible modulation in a single sound-crunching effect. Crush, mangle, and destroy your sounds. Apply careful parallel compression to bring out the details of a sample or recording. Use the envelope follower when recording live instruments for responsive, expressive filter effects.
 
But as well as all that stuff it mainly does it seems to also include an envelope follower which in turn is controlling a filter. The only thing here is that if you are doing that on the way in it is destructive. I would be recording a dry version of the input signal and the envelope follower (controlling a filter) in Pulveriser if I was doing something like that.
 
 

brconflict,
 
Couldn't you do a null test to ensure that the EQ has 0 impact?
 
Take any wave file you like...
 
Import it into a project with nothing on it and PC Enabled with no FX on it and EQ disabled.
 
Bounce to tracks.
 
Next, since we want to do a null test where there is no PC EQ, import the two tracks into some other audio software and flip phase on one and bounce, then normalize. What do you have?
 
I'll try to run the test later, but I don't have Sonar with me at the moment.
 

Last post on this...

POST TITLE....The Pro Channel and IT'S Unique sound" - I don't think that can be "misread" or misunderstood...

The Pro Channel DOES NOT have a "sound"...
THEREFORE it is NOTHING unique...

that was my entire point, and
if you read my first post John, I have applauded the PC and the MODULES.

THERE WAS NO COMPLAINT - only a STATEMENT:
(only complaint was that Cake haven't given us more PC Modules
  and that I'd like to be able to remove the Quad Curve, but that wasn't
  a complaint, just a statement also)

The PC is nothing more then a glorified "effects" bin...in a proprietary format
YES it looks really nice....as you can see the controls without having to 
double click the effect in the bin to open it...but that's it..it's nothing "spectacular"
and EVERYTHING it does can be done with the "effects" bin.  Make 
the Quad Curve EQ and the other Modules  VST's and then it REALLY offers NOTHING extra,
other then "visibility along side the Channel Strip" and where it it sits in the signal chain.
NO ONE WOULD EVEN CONSIDER ARGUING THAT POINT.

The one thing I've found in all these forums is that "objectivity" is VERY RARE or non-existent.

People applaud and praise "their product" regardless of the situation, or whether or not
they are right or wrong, and denigrate other products, having NEVER even used them.
It's the nature of humanity - the "MINE is better because I USE IT" syndrome all to prevalent
in the music business...

The PC MODULES are very good.  However, the Waves API, Neve, and SSL are FAR FAR FAR superior to the Console Emulators
of the Pro Channel....they cost a LOT more also...so they should be superior.
There are VASTLY superior EQ's...
There are VASTLY superior Compressors
There are VASTLY superior Limiters
There are VASTLY superior Gates
There are VASTLY superior Reverbs
There are VASTLY superior Amp Sims...

The main disadvantage...they COST MORE (i.e. not included with the product) so
we should expect nothing more then them being better...

I love Sonar, that's why I use it...but I'm not living in "la-la" land...sorry...

The Pro Channel Modules were DESIGNED to NOT have a unique sound. 
The PC-4K Modules (E/G and Compressor's) were designed to Emulate the SSL 4000 Console
"sound" so it should NOT be unique...

The Console Emulators were designed to "sound" like the API, Neve, and SSL consoles, and 
If Cake was successful, their sound should NOT be "UNIQUE" but should be equal to the
Hardware they were designed to emulate....GET MY POINT HERE...

The only UNIQUE Modules (to Sonar) are the Quad Curve EQ and the Concrete Limiter...
and BOTH of these modules DO add COLOR (sound)

ALL OTHERS EMULATE OTHER HARDWARE....END OF STORY...BYE BYE...

The ProChannel does NOT have a sound....it's an "effects" bin...NOTHING MORE - NOTHING LESS...
The Modules are what have the "sound" and they are very nice...as I stated in my original post.
If you are offended by "misreading" my posts, and thinking that "objectivity" is BASHING Sonar,
I can't help that...

And ANY SANE PERSON from OUTSIDE, coming INTO this forum, and reading the OP's original statement would make the assumption 
that it IS THE PRO CHANNEL ITSELF that has a UNIQUE sound, which it does not have a "sound" at all.

One of the VERY FIRST RULES of literature is you write for THE INTELLIGENT STRANGER...
not for the "famliar" CAKE-ITE forum members...sorry to say...and the OP's statement is IMMINENTLY clear...

And I'm done arguing with the CAKE-ITES....who would argue with a BRICKWALL LIMITER...even when wrong...