RMS normalize

I know there's a peak normalize in sonar, but I would personally find an average RMS normalize function quite useful too, like the RMS normalize in Sony Sound Forge, would be handy to do it from within sonar.

I agree this would be useful.  Being able to RMS normalize will bring up the average then you can using limiters and comps to adjust the dynamic range

Per the survey questions, I'm hoping that they implement a dedicated audio editor with a lot more manipulation tools. I'd love to have it native and stop relying on Sound Forge.

Just use the editor of your choice inside Sonar and be done with it. Have the best of both worlds and let Sonar be a DAW not an audio editor, we already have those.

If you choose a level that will produce peak overs - how is that handled?

 
Most loudness matching or normalization tools are used in tandem with a Limiter to catch the peaks.  It is not a very high finesse way to get you audio files at a desired level, but it is good for broadcast where time saving is crucial.  

I'm working on a project with a band that plays Improvised Ambient Jazz. Had a long recording session (8+ hours of music) and 14 channels.
It would have a breeze to start mixing by normalizing all the clips to (say) -30 dB RMS, have a cup of coffee while the 'puter works on them, and then go from there. But Sonar won't do it.
So instead I have been sitting here for ages using my old Sound Forge from within Sonar to do the trick that should be a built-in feature in any DAW. GRRRR!!! What a waste of time.
 
PS. Also, I would be very happy to see an audio clip analyzer tool. Basic specs* with just a click of a mouse (or two, tops).
*) At least av. RMS levels, peak levels, peak RMS levels (with a user-definable RMS time window).

batsbrew
Myth #1: Normalizing makes each track the same volume
Normalizing a set of tracks to a common level ensures only that the loudest peak in each track is the same. However, our perception of loudness depends on many factors, including sound intensity, duration, and frequency. While the peak signal level is important, it has no consistent relationship to the overall loudness of a track – think of the cannon blasts in the 1812 Overture.

 
Except this thread has nothing to do with peak normalisation.  It is about rms normalisation and I have always said if you get all your tracks at the same rms level then yes they will all be the same volume and it is an excellent state for your tracks to be in before any mixing takes place.  You will never have to add or subtract gain because you will always have the right amount of signal you need to mix.  It is a well kept secret and it one of the most powerful things that will allow a fantastic mix later on.  Too much focus on peak stuff with modern digital DAW's.  This is an old analog trick and it still works!
 
Daniel is also correct in that fixing tracks that have been recorded using rms normalisation is not the best way to go.  Especially of the limiter has to kick in to prevent a peak.  (that is the only reason though because adding gain and not squashing a peak is perfectly OK) But you can track though right at the start and keep all your tracks rms levels the same.  If you choose an rms reference such as K-20 then you won't have too much trouble with peaks.  Let them be where ever they want and don't sweat them.  They are not important as long as they don't clip into 0 dB FS.  Keep your eye on the peak meters too though for sure.
 
You can always use a VU meter over any tracks you may have imported or recorded and tweak the gain after taking a reading. Choose a reference.  The ref level is important though once you get interested in rms.  K-14 is good for a generally loud recording with 14 dB of headroom.  K-20 is better for transients but 6 dB lower in rms level.

batsbrew
you can only go so far with rms normalization,
before you run slap into peak.
 
i suggest never normalizing, 
there are many more reasons than the one i posted above.
 
YMMV
 
but really, there is no valid reason to do it in my opinion

RMS normalization sounds like some sort of mythical unicorn. What I mean is, are you normalizing to a single gain value averaged over time, or are you modifying the gain level over time to keep a consistent RMS value.
 
To me, the first option seems pointless.
 
The second option is merely gain-riding, a form of compression, and if I need to do that, I'd rather ride the fader myself.

John T
I'll tell you what would be handy. Not exactly the same thing, but I think could serve the desired purpose better.
 
Imagine if you could put the gain knobs into a "detect" mode, where you'd play the song for a bit, and it would attempt to auto-adjust the gain levels to a common RMS. So no actual compression going on, just gain adjustment within the overall headroom of the system. Switch it out of detect mode once you think you have it.

those things already DO exist.
seek, and ye shall find.