.
 

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. 

Thanks for the helpful comments here . . .
 
If I mix with plugins galore in Sonar, then use Sonar to render that down to a two-track mixed file  . . .
 
 . . . and take that two -track into Mixbus for the purpose of "Mastering" . . .
 
 . . . then I think I've lost all of the magic "summing" benefit from Mixbus?
 
 
eh? said the codger.
 
 

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. 

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. And you can't just drop a 32-bit plugin in the 64-bit version like you can in Sonar.

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.

cclarry

It just sounds good Beags...you don't need the plugins...it uses VST's,
and, as of V3 it will do VSTi's also...which it did not do in V2...

You can catch in sale for $39 quite often...

 
Yep, last week, when I checked, it was still $39 for the basic version.  I grabbed the 32C version for $99.
 
FYI -- you need to use the links that Larry posted here a while back.  Otherwise, you'll see the normal $79/$299 prices.

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

bapu

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.

 
Tbh it's not so much that you have to do it, it's that the widget which does it is fiddly to use. Other's mileage may differ but I find that as a UI element, it's horribly designed. 

Yup, that too.