I, too, listen to modern "hit radio" or whatever it's called, and am amazed by the quality, even if the songs are juvenile and repetitive. As a writer I am not interested in the kinds of songs I'm hearing, but I am fascinated by the sheer brilliance of the production.
 
Lately, my thoughts on this go back 40 years to when I had a 16-track commercial studio. I was mixing -- obviously -- with an all-hardware setup: 2-inch tape machine into an ATR-100 at 30 ips, forty or so 100mm real faders... But the biggest difference between then and now (for me) is that in the old days I had time-aligned UREI 813 monitors and Crown amplifiers playing in a professionally treated room.
 
Long story short, I was much less experienced than I am now, and my mixes were better, because, I think, I was hearing everything accurately. I don't have the money or the space to recreate that setup today, so I am constantly trying to "adjust" to the inadequacies of my mixing environment. Not to take anything away from the terrific pros who are making these amazing modern recordings, but I wonder if the big edge the majors have is near-perfect monitoring.

Room treatment, good monitoring and good hardware.  Sorry, JB isn't good no matter what anyone may say to me about it but that's jmho.  And I'm Canadian.  He doesn't sing particularly well (he's autotuned almost 100%), his guitar playing and key playing are "ok" at best.  He's certainly not the "prodigy" his manager would have you believe he is.  Sorry.  OP picked a bad example of perfection for me.  BUT, the example is perfect as to what Larry just alluded to and previous posts also.  Max Martin has "the formula" and resources to make anyone sound like that.  Modern production is crafted down to the cadence of the syllables with the beat.  There's no longer just one hook.  The intro has to have a hook, then one for the verse, then chorus, then outro.  Every section changes just a little bit to keep you interested.  There's a LOT of stuff going on to get that audio crack to addict you.  For me it makes it that much better when I actually hear a great singer and just a guitar that grabs me. But then that performer has probably also had the pro mixers/engineers and mastering guys with all the tricks to make it sound awesome too. :)  In any case I do agree, I've also watched the CLA vids.  Pensado's place on YouTube is actually pretty good.  He'll actually dive in and show the effects he's using and settings but as said, the tracks are already recorded so you don't get the recording magic...

There's more to great singing than perfect pitch. Alicia Keys is off a lot of the time but I still love her voice and delivery. Even if she kinda "broke" her voice over the last ten years. I always feel a bit Twilight-Zoned when musically knowledgeable people go off on people like Bieber or Katy Perry. Sure, there are BETTER singers in the world. But to pretend they're talentless hacks shows a gross misunderstanding of what an engineer can actually do. I'm no Max Martin but I'm also not unskilled. I record lots of vocals, many of them "medium" quality, and often you really can't polish what's not there.

Interesting discussion.
 
A friend of mine is really into girl bands & solo girl vocalists - stuff like All Saints, Sugababes, Kylie, Girls Aloud etc.
 
Not only are the songs arrangements nigh on perfect but the space, clarity & production is a REAL ear opener.

I had exactly the same experience with Scream and Shout (Will.I.Am/Britney).  Fantastic production and clarity - and yet sparse.
 
I'm currently working my way through David Gibson's 'Art of Mixing'.  A interesting compliment to the far more technical Roey Izahki's standard tome, particularly if the visual approach aligns with your way of thinking.  Both of these are excellent and give plenty of scope for experimentation.

As for air, try either the Maag EQ (vst or hardware) and boost the 40khz.
If on a serious budget like me, you can use the Maag wannabe, Luftikus at http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=Luftikus&id=1500.
 
As for protecting the vox, The old tried and true says carve out the vocal frequencies from the back track. This is better served today with a multiband compressor or dynamic eq on the back track ducking the backtrack where the offending frequencies are.
 
May I suggest the MixbusTV series of videos, in particular, this one which addresses your vocal query.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey2v8ZEjjcY
 

My attention to great POP production started in the 80's. When I first heard INXS I had the exact same experience as the OP. How did they get that thumping/clear bottom end.... how did they get Michael Hutchence voice to sit where it did.... always on top, never too loud.
 
Performance, production, engineering and gear... it's all relevant.
IMO... I know its been said already but one of the most overlooked ingredients is the arrangement... and how sparse a lot of great recordings really are.

bitman
As for air, try either the Maag EQ (vst or hardware) and boost the 40khz.
If on a serious budget like me, you can use the Maag wannabe, Luftikus at http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=Luftikus&id=1500.
 

Boost 40kHz? - I assume this is a typo and you meant either 4kHz or 10kHz?

dwardzala

bitman
As for air, try either the Maag EQ (vst or hardware) and boost the 40khz.
If on a serious budget like me, you can use the Maag wannabe, Luftikus at http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=Luftikus&id=1500.
 

Boost 40kHz? - I assume this is a typo and you meant either 4kHz or 10kHz?

Bottom right hand corner.

I don't have any ultrasonic transducers in my gig bag...  Will an SM58 do?