Do whatever works for you. That's the beauty of digital: it's actually pretty hard to f*ck it up too badly.

John
I'm with Dave on this.

Me too.
 
I can see a reason for a separate mixbux for those guys who use ARC software in their master bus and don't want to have that printed on their exports ... but I don't use ARC or likewise ...
 
But different goals need different means to get them. Whatever works for you is fine

I am in the "easy setup group" as well.
Besides routing instruments and voc to separate busses. (Reverbs and delays also gets separate busses) I route those directly to Master. I have Master routed to another bus (Correction), with ARC on it, and then out to mains. When exporting, I route directly from Master to mains.
All the best.

Rob[atSound-Rehab]

John
I'm with Dave on this.

Me too.
 
I can see a reason for a separate mixbux for those guys who use ARC software in their master bus and don't want to have that printed on their exports ... but I don't use ARC or likewise ...
 
But different goals need different means to get them. Whatever works for you is fine

I was going to say the same thing. I don't think I could have said it as well.

I use a Submaster and Master Buss.  
I run my reference tunes through Sample Magic  (Magic AB).
I don't want to add more compression, etc. to the already mastered reference tunes, so Sample Magic is
on the Master Buss.  Any global compression, etc. is on the Submaster.
 
If I use ARC II, it does go on the Master Buss and is the last in line.

I don't see what purpose this would serve.  If there are no effects on the pre-Master bus, it does nothing.  If there are effects. why no just put them on Master?
 
I use subs for guitars, vocals, keyboards, drums, orchestra, etc. so I can correct overall levels without messing up all my fader movements; but those subs all go to Master.
 
Someone people may use the pre-Master bus to vary levels so they don't have to touch Master, but that wouldn't really change anything except their perception; and I would not be a fan of riding a fader on an overall mix.

I'm starting to use a new workflow which incorporates Auxiliary tracks and Patch Points (in some way if I can find a use). Does anybody here use external outboard gear to send/return results back into Sonar?
 
I know much of this doesn't need to happen because of newer interfaces which keeps the signal flow along one cable and interface.  The thing is, you see all these producer/engineers in their $10,000 a day studio with their big consoles etc. demonstrating all these plug-ins they probably don't use in final sessions. 
 
It makes me wonder if investing so much money into all of the gear and software is counter productive. I have small needs really.
 
In fact, the next project I do I will try to use as much virtual analogue stuff as possible to see if it actually makes a difference to the final production. My remix and reconstruction of nightwalkers mainly used virtual analogue emulations in software form. So although it's a lot of extra work I think this will be my new workflow.
 
Also I started grouping fader tracks again, so the console mixer behaves more like an automated mixer.

Eventually, all instrument and vocal busses are routed to a bus I call Mix which is then routed to a bus I call Master which is routed to the main outs.
 
On Mix, I place global affects such as bus compression.  On Master, I typically have a metering plugin followed by the Sonarworks Ref 3 headphone plugin.  When I think I'm finished mixing I often put a maximizer first in the chain on Master too, just to hear how that sounds and to see how hard I have to hit an L2, for example.  Before exporting the mix I disable or delete the affects on Master.  I guess I could delete Master altogether, but I usually don't and when I return to tweak the mix the project is still set up.

...wicked
I use two. All my instrument sub-group buses (Drums, Gtr, Synths, Vox...) got to a SUBMASTER bus. I usually keep this at -6dB 

 
By "keep this at -6dB" are you referring to the fader setting?  I ask because that seems to be a fair assumption, for the purpose of leaving headroom for mastering, but if the tracks/busses feeding it are "hot" then the overall signal might approach 0dB.  Thus, what do you do to maintain headroom?
 
And a second question for the group:  I see of lot of mentions about a limiter on the Master bus at -0.1, which makes sense if you're truly using Sonar for real mastering.  If not, wouldn't you want more headroom?
 
Thanks for all the help,
 
Steve

One other thing I'll add to this discussion:
 
For fun I tried the following last night and it's (so far) helpful -- I added a third bus called "headphones" which is fed by the Master bus (temporarily).  It has a headphone reference plugin (Waves Nx system) to use while tracking and mixing as needed.  Before finalizing a track the setup is:
 
1.  The Mixing bus feeds the Master bus and contains console emulations, multiband "glue" compressor (Ozone if necessary), stuff like that.
2.  The Master bus feeds the soundcard but also has a prefader send to the Headphones bus, with the fader temporarily set at zero (to avoid sending double the signal to the soundcard).  Plugs here include a Limiter, Sample Magic A/B for reference, SPAN.  I was pleased to discovered these also work just fine with the fader set at zero (the Sonar singal flow chart was very helpful).  Here's the key:  I created a quick group for the mute buttons on the Master bus and Headphones bus, starting with one on and one off when the group was created.  That way, when I'm ready, I mute the Headphone bus, bring the Master up to zero and it sends directly to the sound card.
 
This may all prove to be too complex in the end, but I like having the Nx system available and not in the Master chain.  YMMV 
 
Steve