Its been a very long day.

Keep passin' the open windows bro...

First of all you are fighting a courageous battle.  And you seem to be willing to learn the hard way.  Bravo, ol pal.  If you have a decent recording chain and post pro plugs you CAN get there. But it's not easy.  I'll give you a for instance.  For my own projects I occasionally wanted that killer upfront dry drum sound of Roger Nichols/Steely Dan.  No matter what  I could never get it.  Then I sat back and thought, what is it about this sound that's different.  I mean really listened and thought.  And derned if it didn't hit me.  Gates.  Justs listen to most Steely Dan studio cuts and you'll hear that there's absolutely no (or minimal) bleed on ANY of the drums or overheads.  I tried it.  Yup, it worked.  But geeze louise, it took me years to figure that out.  There are so many tricks and tried and true setups that really great engineers and mixers use...but, hey, they had to learn them too.  Do some Googling.  Check out the books available.  YouTube.  Anything.  These days, to paraphrase Dave Pensado..."you can mix a hit in your bedroom...it's very possible".  Keep rockin, ol pal.  Don't give up hope.  Everything you try is a learning experience.  How can that be bad??

It would be worth a shot....

 Your Right ..tough to beat the real stuff !!

Seth hit it on the head. Here is a story about my recent day of microphone technique 101 which is a long drawn out tale but here goes.  

I had previously been just sticking my MC012s right at the sound hole of my acoustic for ballads, or right at the neck, XY too but nothing seemed to work for the exceptional guitar ballad sound I have heard on Nashville recordings. So I set aside a few hours with my little Russian mics, a book on mic techniques and my living room. Previously I tried recording in my studio bedroom (too small), garage (too dry) then my living room with the vaulted ceilings and new wood floors (just right). Here is what I found.

Different mic techniques can emphasize the ambiance over the direct sound of the guitar and vice versa. The mic setup when capturing more of the direct sound and less of the ambiance, is too overpowering in a couple of ways. First, it works the compressor too much. Next it works any reverbs or delays too much. The mic setup which starts to let a little or a lot of the room ambiance in (and it needs to be a decent sounding space) works much better with compressors and reverbs/delays. In fact there in lies some very magical sounds when the ambiance of the room resonates a reverb effect versus a closely mic'd source. Another interesting occurrence is that the ambiance creates a deeper and wider mix.

Another aspect of learning microphone characteristics and using the right mic technique is the control you can exert on EQ prior to the mix. Distance from the source and mic type has a myriad of effects along with the room ambiance on EQ. Using an AT4050 with an AT4033 (mid side) creates a very jangly sounding clear acoustic guitar with few low end problems, in fact it produces a well controlled stringy low end, not boomy. Using an XY with 138 degrees versus a 90 degree arc) takes the midrange & low end boominess out of a Martin D45 and adds slightly more room bounce. Lay this into UA EMT 140 plugin and it is a beautiful thing.

Beautiful ballads have a space and ambiance which was built in during tracking and is enhanced by compression and reverbs/delays. Just my observation.

Now if you are referring to the big ballad vocal that competes with the Nashville recordings of recent years, that sound is found in the following chain.

U47 mic, M150, U67 Neumann mic (Avantone is a recent modern mic I know that's being used)  into a
V76 preamp, Neve 1084 or 1073 into a
CL1B compressor in all cases.

There are variations but the CL1B is a Nashville staple except for, surprise, surprise they used a UA 1176 on Allison Krause's latest album for her vocals. That is a little rare.
 
Forgot to add, the vocal booth needs to be a certain size and treated as well (the room once again). That adds to the intimacy of the vocal sound i.e. a tighter space 4x10x7 treated with some foam on the walls gives you a nice dry sound. If you raise the mic capsule just above the blast zone of the vocalist's mouth and put about 8-10 inches of distance (varies by the strength or weakness of the vocalist) you get that nice intimate vocal sound you hear on a lot of ballads.
 
I guess the point of all this is that tracking really good sounds leads to really nice sounding mixes which don't require excessive plugins. All of the above is relative to ballads and r&B and not necessarily useful for other genres. (Void where prohibited, if you experience shortness of breath, dizziness or loss of bladder control, seek a professionals advice, pregnant women and people with heart conditions may be at risk).

Seth and Middleman are probably on track.  It is the room, usually for simple, delicate acoustic recordings.  "Commercial" studios spend a lot of money on the room.  It really helps.  All is not lost, tho.  Spend a day or evening recording your mic/instrument/room and find something the best technique that works.  There is no substitute for the air around a performance.

Next is the chain.  You don't need a vintage neuman (although that helps).  Here at home I've got Oktavas - a 319 LDC and 2 102s SDCs (I got all 3 for $200 back when).  Good but hardly great.  But they can cover just about anything acoustic.  A good mic, good preamp (or a good channelstrip) really helps.  I don't think it matters which preamp you get so much as a pro unit with lots of headroom.  I've heard but haven't used the Gap, and it is like $300.  probably better for R&R, but a grace or Focusrite ISA or Daking is something you will keep even if you win the lotto.  It makes a difference, esp. as you experiment with the mic and room.  You don't have to get right up on the instrument but you can back off a little for the air (which is why the room needs to be good, too).  It is all synergistic, but once you reach a certain level of experience you'll find you want the minimum of equipment.  It isn't a substitute for experience, but the necessity comes after when you can make use of it.  Think how long it took to get the most out of your instrument.  Recording is the same way - a steinway grand is pretty much wasted if you are learning chords.  It sounds better than a beat-up upright, but not much.

@ 

This is not a helpful reply, perhaps, but maybe it would be better not to emulate that sound and just go for your own.  By the time we imitate something that's in the market, the market has moved.

Not that I am a good example of anything, but I use very light reverb in general, and very little compression when tracking and mixing—other than some 1176 style compression on vocals. 

And, when done, I think it is wise as said above to turn the product over to a mastering engineer to make it all gel.

I personally think different is better than slick.  Your mileage may vary.

You've certainly come to some positive conclusions from everyone's comments Jeff.

it's so easy to get caught up in the DAW technology and forget the simple things like mic placement just to mention one basic.

I leaarned from very good teachers to always thnik about where the listening ear/s are in relation to the sound source. Start tweaking at that point and see/hear how the sound changes.
Everything starts with the point of origin of the sound. get that right and the scope for scultping the sound you want becomes much greater.

Of course when we use softsynths we don't hear the sound until it first emerges from the speakers but it's already gone through a long virtual chain of links that each impart a change to the sound. In that case i always imagine the speakers are the instrument I'm listening to and treat it as an acoustic/live instrument from then on and look how I can manipulate the sound before the actual audio stage rather than after. Hope that makes sense.

Thanks for sharing your learning experience with us.

My 2 cents,

Of course "mastering" is the real final "MAGIC" but we do need ambiance and FX, we need reverb.
I too, as others have, struggled trying to get that "magic - glue - sheen" whatever you call it.

I set up busses and run post eq's where needed and then I "massage" reverb with the millions of knobs that are on them.
I, on my limited budget have picked up a few verbs when on sale and tried a lot of freebies as well, including these that come to mind and others: liquid verb/perfect spaces/pantheon/sonitis verb/epic verb/cakewalk fx verb/t-racks hall/waves IR-L

With research, experience and listening I have improved, but still not satisfied.

Then I tried a demo of EastWest Quantum Leap Spaces (convolution) and WOW!
(http://www.soundsonline.com/Spaces)
It is $300 but the sound is incredible and it is so very easy to use (just a couple of knobs).
Once I started using Quantum Spaces my mixes improved and I can actually use the  'verb as an effect and and push the reverb to the, front, it sings....it is truly a magic.
My point is that no matter what reverb I used and no matter how long I worked them I was never really satisfied. Until QS.
So sometimes it is the "plane not the pilot that gets you off"!!!

Yes, I made the same comment to someone yesterday.  "um, yes, this is pretty good.  But it's tough to duplicate the "sound" you hear on the radio.  Well, for one, their million dollar studios equipped to the hilt sure don't hurt!  Secondly, usually the talent level is of the highest quality and that combination is not easy to emulate.   Hours upon hours spent trying to get that little "something"....and yes, I'm my worst critic...never totally happy.  Just getting started with X1 myself.  GREAT piece of software.
 
 
 Dave Berriman
 
http://soundcloud.com/david-berriman

Also, something to take into consideration. Some guys say how do I get that radio ready sound. My wife worked in radio for some of the top rated stations in middle Ga. You would not believe how hard radio slams that perfect mix and master of ours with their own signal processing before it is transmitted out. Some of them are so compressed and limited to the point that the recording sound almost anti-dynamic. I know some labels are now sending radio stations cds that are mixed and mastered with less compression because they know that they will be slammed so hard.

jerrypettit


The one thing that has surprised me in listening to the demo songs provided with SONAR (and especially with FL STUDIO) is the importance of delay on the tracks.  I can be fairly oblivious of its prevalence and then stop the song while it's playing and...there it is:  echo, echo, echo.

When the whole song is playing it is subtle--stop suddenly and you see just how important it is in getting the "sound".

My two cents.

I recently responded to the future feature request thread and was I was promptly derrided because I had asked for the basic ability to shift time (sample delay) for audio tracks. I had used a digital recording console for about 7 years that had the simple ability to "delay" every channel's output by up to 16383 samples. This is not the same as a delay effector. That made it possible to even delay one side of a stereo track that was being returned on say channels one and two. Delaying a left or right side by about 15 or 20 ms can make a awesome difference in the sound field. I really know of no other way to create that effect in a simple manner. Returning a  mono track into mulitple channels while using multiple sample delay times created stunningly amazing tracks. I cannot undestand why Sonar doesn't have a widget on the console for such a basic thing.  
I repeat this is not the same as a delay box.
 

Great thread. Thanks for all the insight.

re: delay.

Im getting some good results cloning a track or mix, then using the move tool to move one track out a few sample or ms.

Advice on mic: My best mic is a 4033 and Id like to upgrade, but cant afford more than a $1000 . I do have the UA pre and RME pre. Which mic would you suggest in my price range?

Wondering: What makes the high-end mics so special? Why couldnt one achieve the same results with any mic...using the right combination of gain,eq,and other fx ?  Is there a "plug" to make my 4033 sound like a "U87" ?

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk
]

Could this "room" sound you're referring to you actually be a room? IOW, were these recordings you are trying to emulate recored in really great sounding rooms? If so, perhaps you can find out what studio(s) they were recorded at and then see if anyone has made an impulse response of that room that you could load into Perfect Space?

Seth beat me to it.