Separate mastering suite versus "mastering" within Sonar?

Don't get me started as it is not my intention to bash Sonar for being week in only one out of hundreds of cool things it can do for us.  But basically if you use software that is optimized to do a certain task, then you find all the tools and features are faster and more user friendly.  
I'll just give you an example of how I use Wave Lab after I've exported from Sonar and maybe that will show you what I mean. 
 
Open the Wave file. 
Look at the start of the song, Place cursor at where I want it to start Shift /Home /Delete. 
There is noise in the 2 seconds before the song starts. place cursor at the precise place the music starts. Shift /Home / Backspace = silence. 
Open the normalizing tool and ask it to tell you the peak level. Make the decision to Normalize to -04Db. 
Look at end of song and find the spot where music has faded to zero and shift/ end/delete,  possibly add a new fade out. 
now we can master. Lots of tools. 
Open Global analyzer and find  your peak RMS level. I won't go into detail but this step is critical if you want to bring your song up to modern day levels and actually see where your at. From here you might need to manually look for peaks, apply eq to Plosives, this is where your really Mastering and is to detailed to explain. But most Daw's have none of these tools. 
 
All editing like applying a snippet of EQ to a plosive is fast and one or 2 mouse clicks.. All tools like EQ remain open in little GUI while you work. They don't close after one use. I could go on and on.
And each Wave editor has it's good and bad point's just like DAWS. I have tried all the major brand  of Wave editors  from free ware to full demos and I return to Wave Lab mostly because it's tools are so easy to use, and way  less mouse clicks away. I think you are the only one who can choose which you like the most.  So I highly recommend you get your hands on as many demos as you can and go at it. 
They are not as expensive as DAW anyhow, Wave Lab Elements was only $90.
 
Sound Forge I think was the most expensive. But it's super powerful, I just didn't like the way it flowed.   
 
And mastering is an extra step. Always has been. No one should try and do the mix down ( export)  as a master at the same time. I firmly believe in the mastering process as a completely different task. The right person, the right software make a huge difference.  

cparmerlee

johnnyV
I cannot see any other way of working on a 2 track files. It is just that it was designed to do this task from the ground up. 

I guess I should clarify.  Most of my live recordings are from 4-16 tracks.  I rarely do a stereo recording, so I bring that material into Sonar for mixing and other processing.  I am just trying to understand whether the benefits of a unique mastering suite justify the extra step in my case.
 
There are Sonar plug-ins for most of the functions you find in Ozone.  But it could be that the way it is all put together in Ozone (and other competitive platforms) makes it easier to make that final stereo mix shimmer.
 
I suppose ultimately I will need to spend some time with the demo version of Ozone, but I appreciate any input.
 
Maybe another way to ask the question is, can anybody identify things that are easy to accomplish in Ozone (or similar products) that are more difficult to do in SONAR?

I have Ozone 5 Advanced (will upgrade to 6 when it is available). I use the separate plug ins for EQ, Dynamics, etc. in each track. When I have a final mix I export it as a stereo file and then import it back into Sonar to do final "Mastereing". If I am doing an album (for friends), I have a separate track for each song going to a separate buss that contains Ozone plus Concrete Limiter to catch any peaks that might have slipped by in the mixing stage.
Each buss then goes to the Master buss that uses Insight to look at the RMS and peak levels and the Volume level.
Since I've used this method, my songs are very nicely balanced and the volumes are consistent.
 
I like the Dynamic Plug in Ozone since it gives great visual indications to what's happening to the waveforms.
 
Walt