Yeah nice one Craig. It does sound full yet I can almost hear the silent bits poking through at the same time which is what the black backdrop is like. I get the feeling everything that is in there needs to be there and you have stopped at some point which is also very good.

Nice essay video about Steely Dan from Nerdwriter. Not a totally technical perspective as such, nor posting to because it solves the OPs situation, but just because it's become part of the topic.
 
I like Nerdwriter, but he does have a habit      of finishing       his videos          in the same                       way!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSDD8rgUiNc      

As a coda to this thread...I remembered this song as an excellent example of how you can morph from very few tracks to somewhat more tracks and end up sounding extremely full - yet you can still identify every instrument clearly. Talking Heads were very good at this...
 

 
As to how this relates to SONAR, try muting tracks selectively to see what happens. Look at the Master output meter to see how often removing a track doesn't appreciably reduce the level.

Anderton
As a coda to this thread...I remembered this song as an excellent example of how you can morph from very few tracks to somewhat more tracks and end up sounding extremely full - yet you can still identify every instrument clearly. Talking Heads were very good at this...
 

 
As to how this relates to SONAR, try muting tracks selectively to see what happens. Look at the Master output meter to see how often removing a track doesn't appreciably reduce the level.

Every word of this is true. But I'm reminded of a Patty Larkin lyric that I believe applies quite well here. 

'We were a couple of kids crawling out of the crib
Talking about the positives and the negatives of wine
Living our lives just like Hemingway did
But he was lucky, he was a genius most of the time'

Both the song and video are examples of excellence we all would do well to strive for. 

Great ideas all. I love this forum for the unlimited information that I glean. Some things you might want to try. On time based effects, set them to line up mathematically to the rhythm of the song. The capo idea is great - another alternative if you have an inexpensive acoustic or electric hanging around, re-string it Nashville style. Capo's, inversions, Nashville stringing, different tunings all can allow for 'supporting tracks' that limit the mud.

Mic techniques, and different Mics are your friend to help differentiating each guitar track too. Sometimes, 'all those tracks' are different Mics, in different positions, and placed in various areas in the room, capturing one instrument. You might try a 57 off axis near the grill, or a ribbon centered on the cone 12 inches from the grill. If you have an open back cab, try a 57 in front and in back, both the same distance away from the speaker, pointed about the same place on the speaker, and set one of them out of phase.

One thing that helps for me - I try to flesh out the purpose of the song before I start. Not all times, but more often than not. When I'm recording, I ask myself 'does this part support the theme, emotion and lyrics of the song'. If it does, I keep the track. I might not use it, but it's there. I usually delete any track that doesn't fit, before I even get to the mix process. Don't keep mud. 😀 For me, lyrics are the key in the genre I love. I try to set them up in front of the mix process, as a guide to keep or lose tracks. Even if it's the greatest guitar I have ever played, if it steps on the vocals or lyric image, out it goes!

The nice thing is Sonar reduces the time I'm not playing. With all of the productivity tools it has, I can spend more time with my guitar in my hands, and the creativity switch ON.

No expert here; but what I would try first (I mostly mix heavy-metal type guitar) is cut out anything below 100hz or so on every guitar with a good 48db or more high pass filter. Then watch out for the 500hz regions for mud.
 
Then timing becomes very important, a lot of slightly-out-of-time notes are going to make things messy.
 
To make a bigger sound with fewer guitars, add a pitch decrease or increase in hundredths of a semi-tone to a couple of the guitars.

kevinwal

Below is the**UNLISTED** link to the video, please don't share it...the song is only a day old so it's very rough, and I'll remove the link before too long to avoid additional personal embarrassment. 

 
Your rough mix is better than my mastered tracks. Nice work, Craig, and a very cool song indeed.

Thanks, but also remember that the fewer tracks you have, the easier it is to make a mix that works. There's a domino effect with "less is more"...everything becomes simpler, including mastering.

im beginning to learn, sometimes less is more.
even EQ ing guitars these days, not going crazy like I used to..trying to remove every offending frequency.
now a hi pass / low pass and cut where the harshness is and its done.
 
I am one of those people grew up on an 8 track reel. you used those tracks to their fullest potential.
panning drums on 1 and 2. bass on 3. guitars on 4,5 and 6. then vocals went on 7 and 8.
most of the time recording vocal on 7, live bouncing back ups to 8, then re recording 7 as the lead vocal.
 
I created some great tracks using only 8 tracks.
long story short, I get a DAW and somehow my track tally went up to 30 tracks.
so many years ago I decided to go back to basics. my projects do have a lot of tracks, but those tracks are not always playing simultaneously. the more tracks, the harder it is for separate instruments to stick out in a mix.