@LA2A perhaps you would be interested in one of these, worth the money I would get out your credit card now:
http://www.theabsolutesou...digital-interconnects/

Did you say you use Sonar X3? Let's hear some of your tests...

Hey Craig,
 
I hate to go off topic on a thread that veers around like a drunk in heavy seas, but I remember your thread about SONAR's Console Emulation.  I usually don't use CE, but did on one song (kind of a ZZ top sounding thing) and CE was the perfect thing to glue it together, since the parts sounded disparate instead of a whole.  Worked like a charm.  I still don't use CE as a matter of course, but realize it is a valuable tool now that it accomplished what I couldn't otherwise.  I don't know if it does what an api or Neve console does here in my home studio - I don't have one to compare to.  I do know it fixed a song, and I do use it on certain tracks, just not all the time on everything.
 
Which is much like what the other Cake emulations do.  They are a tool.  I'd rather have hardware - but unless I had racks of stuff I couldn't get the sound I do w/ Cake PC.  And that is another thing - part of the charm of the 1176 sound, or LA2A was it highlighted important tracks.  It wasn't slathered on everything, simply because it was too expensive.  If you were lucky enough to have one, you put it on something other than the cowbell.  I've found it is sometimes good not to add much of anything, esp. compressors, to tracks (esp. finished loops).  Subtractive EQ to slot a loop or recording into the song, but I'm trying to only use comps where the is an obvious need.  Stuff like lead vocals, lead guitar, drum/guitar buss (there the SSL comp does make it sound like a genuine big studio effect).
 
@

AT
 And that is another thing - part of the charm of the 1176 sound, or LA2A was it highlighted important tracks.  It wasn't slathered on everything, simply because it was too expensive.  If you were lucky enough to have one, you put it on something other than the cowbell.

 
That is a really, really excellent point and one that I haven't heard expressed so succinctly.

There seems to be some persistent condescending snide cynical undertones being emphasized toward me that i wasn't expecting; not too sure what caused all that, but anyway, thanks for the links, i'll be sure to check those. I'm not very good at researching things, not my forte really, i just thought the Sonar forum would be the quickest place to find some heads-up on any links to info about the pro channel, and that people would be happy to oblige, short and sweet, not sure what all the other conundrum is about. It almost seems that some people in here work for the criminal profiling department of the FBI in tandem with paranoid psychiatrists. 
 
Most people were responding with comments effectively saying that no emulation can ever perfectly emulate a real-life counterpart, and that it's mostly ballpark stuff. Even Mr Anderton posted a reasonably lengthy post saying as much, therefore i drew what i deemed to be logical conclusions from those comments, but it all seemed to contrast Slate Digital's own statements about their emulations being nigh-on 'perfect'. I mean, is this following statement from Slate Digital not self explanatory... "We meticulously modelled the ENTIRE CIRCUIT PATH so that we could RECREATE EVERY SUBTLE NUANCE that makes these consoles the legends that they are, says Slate."
 
I said earlier on that Cubase and Sonar are my favourite DAWs, no more need be said i reckon. Why would anyone think i don't use Sonar?

LA2A
There seems to be some persistent condescending snide cynical undertones being emphasized toward me that i wasn't expecting; not too sure what caused all that

It didn't become mainstream until you said: "Going by all the replies, the consensus seems to be that "NO! The Pro channel is not an 'accurate' emulation." People don't like to have words put in their mouths, and I would imagine people who took the time to give nuanced responses in a sincere attempt to answer your question would find it particularly objectionable.
 

Most people were responding with comments effectively saying that no emulation can ever perfectly emulate a real-life counterpart, and that it's mostly ballpark stuff. Even Mr Anderton posted a reasonably lengthy post saying as much

 
And you persist in doing it. I never said "as much" as it was "ballpark stuff." You're the one who used the term "identical," not me. Saying that something cannot be "identical" is not the same as saying it's "ballpark stuff."
 

therefore i drew what i deemed to be logical conclusions from those comments, but it all seemed to contrast Slate Digital's own statements about their emulations being nigh-on 'perfect'.

 
Comparing nuanced statements from users to absolute statements by a marketing department is probably not the best way to determine the reality of a situation.

LA2A
I mean, is this following statement from Slate Digital not self explanatory... "We meticulously modelled the ENTIRE CIRCUIT PATH so that we could RECREATE EVERY SUBTLE NUANCE that makes these consoles the legends that they are, says Slate."

Wow that's great. Is this offer available in the shops? Do I get a free gift with it? BTW Does it have crackling pots, the dope that's fallen through the faders, the sprinklings of cocaine on top of the VU meters, the hiss when all the faders were turned up to 11, the engineer who understood the desk inside out, the blood of junkies over the master bus, the crackle of patch chords that weren't cleaned in braso? The smell of vomit purified by angels drowning in whale tears? THE TALENT BUTTON.

If you can emulate that I'm in.

CakeAlexS
If you can emulate that I'm in.

 
Just be aware that the virtual contact cleaner costs $5,000, and must be applied to the mixer every four months (every six weeks if you're located in LA - the air pollution corrodes the virtual contacts more quickly).

I'm the one who called it ball-park stuff, and I stand by it, although it's a vague term in itself. For the reasons Craig stated, it is simply impossible and futile to emulate a single console 1:1. Slate didn't do that either, no matter how you interpret their marketing speak.

Let's just say you would have gotten pretty much the same answers if you had asked this question about VCC.

LA2A
I mean, is this following statement from Slate Digital not self explanatory... "We meticulously modelled the ENTIRE CIRCUIT PATH so that we could RECREATE EVERY SUBTLE NUANCE that makes these consoles the legends that they are, says Slate."

Slate makes some great things...
But... "subtle" isn't exactly his style. 
Watch the Raven demo videos for a dose of the "dramatic".  
You're accepting marketing verbiage as 100% truth (from Slate).
 
One the flip-side, you're making quick assumptions about the Cakewalk emulations (Overloud did the modeling).
What folks are saying is that even the best of the best of emulations (models) are just that... an emulation.
It's never going to be 100% identical to the original.  Doesn't matter who does the modeling...

Ummm, Mr Anderton, i notice you have 'hyper-focused' on nearly every word of every context of every point in my posts, and then in reply interpreted my posts to mean only what you wanted them to mean quite apart from what they actually meant, and then you ultilized your interpretations of my words to form what appears to be a misplaced rebuke and rebuttal; i just want to know what your point is and i want it spelt-out clearly, are you up for that? Put your cards face-up on the table mate! Like me! Just keep it simple, you have plainly said words to the effect that the pro channel is not an accurate emulation of the hardware and that no emulation ever will be; chime in anyone, and tell me if i misread Mr Anderton's verbose replies.
 
I see more of what i deem would constitute false accusation and misconstruing of my statements, and that is what i don't appreciate Mr Anderton! You know perfectly well that nearly every post in reply to me in this thread basically stated that the pro channel is not an accurate emulation, and even that any emulation never will be accurate, as did yourself, do i need to cut&paste the words from those posts? Geeezz, I drew a clear common sense conclusion, and then you say something to the effect that i drew false conclusions; so does that mean you all said... "Yes! The pro channel is an accurate emulation" Which is it Mr Anderton? Tell me! Have you made-up your mind yet? Is the pro channel accurate or not? Just tell me in plain words right here, i'd like to hear your plain and simple answer!
Clearly the consensus in here is that NO! The pro console is not an 100% accurate emulation. You Mr Anderton were saying that i drew this perception of the general consensus wrongly, and yet CAN YOU SHOW ME ONE REPLY THAT SAID THE PRO CHANNEL 'IS' AN ACCURATE EMULATION? No you can't! And that's because THE GENERAL CONSENSUS WAS EXACTLY AS I STATED!! 
 
Why did you interpret my words falsely? Your replies seem quite extraneous to the initial enquiry of my opening post. I can confidently say that the VCC collection is indistinguishable form the real-life counter parts, and no more different than the differences between the actual real-life analog units of the same mixing desk; i'll happily be on record as saying there is very little if any discernable difference between the VCC collection and the real-life componentry they emulate, so Slate Digital has indeed succeeded in producing an 'accurate' emulation, only God himself could do better, and that's saying something!
 
Tell us Mr Anderton what you said in your review of the Slate Digital emulations, would you care to do that?
 
The quoted words from Slate Digital's website... "Recreate EVERY SUBTLE NUANCE" are the words of Stephen Slate himself, not the marketing department, so Mr Anderton, you're making more false claims.
 
Any while i'm here, what part of "Recreate EVERY SUBTLE NUANCE" DIDN'T YOU UNDERSTAND? Opps, i forgot, those were the 'lies' of the marketing department.
 
Don't play word games with me Mr Anderton! You've managed to misconstrue an entirely innocent post into something more akin to a subversive conspiracy on my part. Where the hell did that come from?