Mixerman, who many are probably aware is a huge spokesman for the benefit of analog summing, recommends the use of Steven Slate's Virtual Console Collection as an alternative for people who don't have access to a console. 

I tried mastering a track in Mixbus and was not happy with the outcome. It was a hop hip track full of detail and a very robust sounding mix. I did not mix the track but was dealing with a very full on sound.  I found Mixbus changed things a little too much for me in the wrong direction of softening stuff through tape/signal saturation or just adding top end in where it was not needed. I got a different result in Studio One directly. A clearer more detailed final mastered sound. ( I probably could have got the sound right too in Mixbus I believe with more time but there was a deadline. You can still get a big clean analog sound too)  But Mixbus can really make other things sound slightly more wonderful. It might be the summing engine plus the whole strip concept with M32C plus noise and crosstalk from around the input states too.
 
Studio One now has a new console shaper CTC-1 which models three consoles. A Neve type of sound and and SSL type plus a third user setting type which can sound different again to the other two. I like what the CTC-1 brings to the table toward the end of a production near final mixing stages. The user mastering console setting sounds like a pristine mastering console. I have just mastered a solo piano recording through this setting and very happy with how it sounds. The CTC-1 models crosstalk from early in the signal flow even with the loudest channels crosstalking into the closer adjacent channels etc. Mixbus is doing this too I believe. 
 
Mixbus tends to add that weight to the sound early on from the track themselves. Through buses and into the final mixbus. The EQ in the 32C is really something as well lending a real sound to your channel. It never gets brash or harsh up high always smooth and crystal like. You can EQ everything with just the channel strip EQ now in 32C. I do like the whole view of your production through the console rather than more so in the arrange windows but in console mode. It makes sense to add to the whole concept way of working. More like we used to with tape. It was the console that was the focus. You see the signal flow with a console.  Mixbus looks great on a larger screen too. 12 busses is more than enough for even the most complex of mixes. I am keen to get into the midi side of M32C and see if I can make the same connections with my synth hardware like I can now with Studio One.  And use a bunch of virtual instruments at the same time. Ver 4 of 32C will be interesting and it should be out pretty soon. 
 
It is different enough of a DAW to partner your regular chosen DAW. They preform well together. It is not hard to export stems either. There are ways of routing audio through Mixbus while you are also working within your main DAW. In real time. If you have two computers you can do this easily.
 
Using Mixbus for stereo mastering to begin with is what I did and yes you can still hear how it changes the sound. You are getting a channel strip sound plus the Harrison console sound finally added in. But it does more when you are mixing a larger number of tracks for sure. The built in dynamics and EQ everywhere get you into that mentality of getting a lot of things sorted early on at track level. 

sharke
One thing that does take a little getting used to in Mixbus is the concept of using stereo plugins on mono tracks. In Sonar, if you insert something like NI's stereo Passive EQ onto a mono track, the routing through the plugin is handled automatically. In Mixbus, you have to use their fiddly little routing widget to pass the audio through one side of the plugin. I find that awkward. 

I do have to agree with you there James.
 
I've had convo's with Ben @ Harrison on this. No movement yet.
 
We do have to remember that the core of that functionality lies within Ardour.
 
Ben may be reluctant to attempt to override that functionality (this is purely speculative on my part). He did say he could see in the end that some mixture of people will prefer the "manual" control over the "automatic" background magic that SONAR performs. 
 
Since my goal is to record/edit/fx in SONAR and mix/master in MB I see this a minor nit as I expect to use less and less plugs in MB than I do in SONAR.

32C V4 is just around the corner now. I'm getting excited. Just in time for the next mix project. YAY!

Yup, that too.

Starise
prefer

That's it in a nutshell. Different strokes for different folks.

Who ever said bouncing tracks back and forth?
 
I only go one way.
 
Wait.... that might not have sounded like what I meant.

Starise
 
I think I would prefer a plug in to moving files and working between apps.

Using the routing options available on the new MOTU interfaces I could actually manage to route the Sonar buses to Mixbus INs ... no bouncing, start transport in Sonar, mix in Mixbus ... however, that was a while ago and due to lack of time I have not pursued it any further so I can't tell about the true downsides (the obvious one would be no fast bounce)

Soundwise

bapu
You know what would be fun? Send me those multi-tracks and I'll put them in MB32C and I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
 
Again... that may not sound like what I meant.

I'm not saying, that Pro Channel in Sonar sounds the same as mixdesk in Mixbus. How about sending you the entire project?

Sure PM me.

I will if it's allowed.

Starise
The Waves plug I linked looks to be almost identical in concept. The thing I liked about it was you can sum through it. This should yield the same or a similar result, would it not? It is based on actual consoles too. One of them Neve. Sonar already has both bus and channel emulation.

 
 
Mixbus has more than just console summing. It's dynamics processing and EQ. But all these modules are available for the Pro Channel and then some. The closest third party plugin would be Waves' SSL 4000 Collection, IK British Channel & White Channel, and channel strips by other manufacturers, such as TheStrip by DDMF, etc.
 

Starise
I think a test sounds like a great Idea. Uploading to Soundcloud only gives us a 128 mp3  though. Not sure if that's good enough to tell.

I've used a multitrack from David Glenn's website. Not sure if any of us have the right to redistribute it via forums, otherwise I would post the link to the .CWB project in this thread.
But you can do this test on your own.
To see wht plugins add to the mix it doesn't have to be finished and polished mix. I set the levels and panning roughly to -12 db, then routed groups to corresponding busses, like Drums, Guitars and Vox. Then made some coarse adjustments in 3 dB increments and then made a couple of fine adjustments, e.g., set the lead vocal to be slightly above the rest, dilaled tambourine lower. That's it.
The final step was to enable PC Tube, Console and Tape and pick the console type, tape bias per group of channels (swap select channels, then Control + click/drag to change settings simultaniously).
Once it's done you can audition the mix turning effects on/off (by hitting "E" key) on the fly.

sharke
Mixerman, who many are probably aware is a huge spokesman for the benefit of analog summing, recommends the use of Steven Slate's Virtual Console Collection as an alternative for people who don't have access to a console. 

Every time I've tried to embrace NLS I feel like I get a more narrow stereo field, not wider, and just a bunch of saturation.
 
I'm really hoping to implement an analog summing situation at some point...

bapu

Soundwise
I've used a multitrack from David Glenn's website. Not sure if any of us have the right to redistribute it via forums, otherwise I would post the link to the .CWB project in this thread.
 

I think you can post a mix as long as you reference where the tracks came from.
 
You could post a link to the multi-tracks on DG's site, ya?

I can't, but you can!

How about a blind test? First, my apologies if I'm misreading something.....but is it possible for those with a dog in this hunt to post items without saying which is which?😃

Like was mentioned earlier in the thread... once the "deliverable" / song is processed in a DAW past the industry standard tweaks and beyond...., then the concept per each sound engineer or other, that
"mine is better than yours"
comes from the gray matter between our ears. Or our heart. Or both. (me)

Like folks who say streaming audio past a 320kbs standard doesn't make a difference because no one can tell the difference between that and higher quality streaming. (but there really is an audible difference) on certain songs.

The best of some things becomes an opinion at some point. And you know how many people have opinions.

*If for some reason this won't apply here, again please forgive me. But I just had this discussion lasts weekend with a peer.
We were both right 😃.