I am not making stuff up as I go along at all. My findings are based on actual results of experimentation. I base a lot of what I say on what I hear not what I think.
 
A comparison would not take years. It is a simple matter of creating a number of busses in Sonar and have them all at unity gain. Send whatever to them and make sure the balances of each buss is good. Export the busses without EQ and dynamics. Import the buss prints into Mixbuss and set those tracks to unity gain. You should hear a pretty similar mix. Add EQ and dynamics to taste on the buss prints. Sum them all using Mixbus and export the completed file. Compare the two final mixes.
 
Thinking that Sonar produces a mix that nothing else can surpass is naive. There are other very serious alternatives as to how you mix your final productions and Mixbus is definitely one of them. I don't think you quite get it and it sounds like you are not ready (at this point) to investigate or appreciate these finer details. I thought you were open to it but obviously I was wrong.
 
I have produced absolutely stellar mixes in Sonar and in my current DAW (Studio One) It is just that what I am hearing when Mixbus is doing the final mixing stages is sounding a little better and nicer to me. Anything that can jump up the quality level must be considered very seriously. It is also great for mastering too. You use what tools there are out there to achieve a desired result. It requires an open mind however.

Alright then, if you wanted Sonar to produce exactly the sound that Harrison Mixbus produces, how would you do that? What combination of plugs would you use, and would they cost more than the price of HM?

Alternatively, you could just buy HM and finish your mix in that. Regardless of whether or not it's marketed as a fully fledged DAW, the fact is that you appear to be able to use the software to get a particular sound, and whether or not you think that sound is desirable or worth the current $40 asking price is a matter of personal opinion. Same as with any other audio production software. I don't see what the problem is.

Getting Sonar or any other DAW to produce the exact same sound as the Mixbus may be difficult. And it might not be a matter of using the UAD plugins to do it either. Currently UAD are the only people that make plugins that may get close to it. But reading the website and listening to a few interviews with them seems to indicate they have built a lot of special things actually into the DAW itself and it is not just a matter of getting plugins to do it. I am also getting the impression that they have taken it further than the UAD plugins too.
 
But as right now the price of the Mixbus is very cheap so it does not really matter having to go into it for the final mix stages. Even at it's full price I feel the expense is well worth it.
 
It also looks and feels like a mixing console, much more so than most DAW's. It has been designed by a console manufacturer so they have come it from a different angle. And it shows when you use it. It is very easy to get around and they have made a lot of things very simple and easy to use and also they are permanent switches and things that do not need to be inserted etc. Many things are right at hand just like they are in a real mixer.
 
There is no problem at all. At first I thought going over to a different DAW just for the mixing phase would be an issue but after hearing it I don't think so now. It is actually very enjoyable to go over to it.

Here's what I can say...

Try it.....for $39.....it's a steal...

As I stated before...I've paid a LOT more for a LOT less!

It would be steal at the $219...
 
When you consider that Waves SSL, API, and Neve list for $650...and even on sale still cost about $300...
 
and others as well are usually quite pricey...

Here's the thing...this program does something that no other program I've used does..
and no plugin will do....the sound is unique...everything about it...and there's a lot...
 
Granted, it's not the BE ALL AND END ALL of DAW's....but it's definitely got it going on....
 
And, as Jeff has stated, you will NOT get it any other way....no plugin, no nothing...
in the sound dept....that's all I'm saying...

John, at this point it is NOT a full fledged DAW, and Harrison is aware of that...
it's current use is AUDIO...but MIDI is in the pipeline...and hopefully 64 bit as well...


I paid $49...and I would have been happy had I paid the full $219 for what I got...
it's pretty impressive for that kind of money...and, as in investment in the future 
HM....I think it's a pretty solid gamble...

Peace...

FYI from the old thread regarding Ardour-
http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/2483141

But reading the website and listening to a few interviews with them seems to indicate they have built a lot of special things actually into the DAW itself and it is not just a matter of getting plugins to do it. I am also getting the impression that they have taken it further than the UAD plugins too.
 
I disagree with this, and yes, I own Mixbus. I think it has everything to do with the included plugins (eg Tape Sat which can't be switched off) rather than secret hocus pocus. Having said that..... according to Mixbus website the plugins are based on Harrison XTools technology from their digital desks and as Harrison themselves state: "Unlike DAW plugins which only emulate the look of external gear, Xtools actually sound as good as the best external gear available. " So maybe Harrison are the first company to actually exactly replicate outboard gear even when other companies such as Steinberg-Portico claimed to do it (Portico bundle $799 and claimed by users of the hardware to be %90 of the 'way there'). 
 
One thing I have found just playing around with it is that it can't use side chain versions of 2.4 VSTs. I do like the look and feel of it and the mousewheel support.
 
My favorite Tape Saturation is Slate VTM but I haven't tried UAD.

Thanks Larry. I am sorry for the strange font in this original post. Don't know what happened anyway I have redone it below.

Wow Jeff, I didn't know you could type Russian!!!

To backwoods and others interested in this. Been doing some research on it. And lots of testing too. (FYI I have quoted some parts of the reviews that have been linked on their website)
 
Firstly the Harrison UAD plugin is only modeled on one part of the Harrison channel strip and that is the EQ section. Harrison themselves have said that there is much more to the sound of their consoles than this modeled EQ. They say the sound of running a plug-in version of its channel strip through the summing architecture in the aux buses and the main summing bus of most DAW's results in a sound that is unsatisfactory.
 
Straight away that is implying that there is maybe a lot more going on than just the EQ section in terms of console emulation. So yes they are doing something additional and very good to perhaps how normal console emulation in a DAW occurs. It seems to be also well ahead of the UAD version. On top of this you have got a rather nice EQ sections in all three areas such as channel strips, buses and masterbuss. All a bit different in what they do as well. The compressors everywhere also sound very good, they make it easy to set and the all important parameters are on the channel strip itself making them visible.
 
The summing algorithm seems to be one of its strong points. Buses feel like they have generous headroom. You can combine a good amount of signal through them, and still maintain a warm, meaty low/low-midrange without muddying the upper midrange. This could be attributed to the 32 bit floating-point operation or just well written code. Relative to Pro Tools and Logic reviewers have found it to be cleaner and more akin to Nuendo or even a hardware console.
 
So now you have got a very close sound to a hardware console. How do you work in your DAW with one of those. Start by removing your EQ in your DAW and set that on your mixer instead. Most often well designed console EQ will nearly sort out all of your EQ requirements. And as you would work with console EQ you can still use your DAW EQ for more surgical applications perhaps or special tone shaping at the same time. You can do that in Mixbus too. Simply export the track with any special internal DAW EQ on. Do the broader stuff in Mixbus instead.
 
Next if you had a console with great dynamics control on all its channels, buses and the masterbuss you would more than likely use them too.
 
One reviewer analysed the compressor's behaviour on a picked acoustic bass. In the original source material, the high-midrange pick attack was relatively even throughout the performance while the lows jumped around in level, particularly during slides and hammer-ons. With a few quick tweaks, the compressor drew out a good amount of harmonic content, thoroughly enriching the midrange surrounding the attack. He was impressed with the way it leveled out the chaotic lows without causing noticeable pumping in the upper mids. He tried several other software compressors on the same source without such pleasing results. There must be a well structured detector 'circuit' and an intelligent auto release.
 
Update: The channel compressor is not so much a good thing over a whole mix in a mastering situation. The mastering compressor is much better at this and sounds way better. Also I am not a big fan of the mastering limiter either. Xenon is better for this job and somehow maintains great transients while limiting hard. But at track level though the built in compressor and limiters containing individual things I think would be good. These are only minor things compared to how good it sounds overall. Add is some final touches on your buses or master with tape saturation in for some extra colour. Mixbus is offering you all this.
 
It is like you are going to a different studio to mix your track and it feels like it too. You are not editing now at this point really. You are well past that stage and using this DAW for a very different reason.
 

I completely agree with Jeff on the above...

MixBus is a tool.  Just as other DAW's and Plugins are tools.

And MixBus is a REALLY good tool I have to say.  And for $39 - that says EVERYTHING!
 
I've paid 5 times that for plugins that were "ok"....not spectacular, and they couldn't record
and edit and mix and so on....

MixBus has a GREAT SOUND.  That's it.  But it isn't the "ONLY" sound.  API, NEVE, SSL, REDD, and
a zillion different modules have different "sounds" and THAT  is what this whole "Mixing" business
is about.  Using the "TOOLS" at your disposal, in combination, to get a GREAT SOUND.  

End of story, that's all ...bye bye...