Evening all,
 
This isn't so much a technical issue as such I just wanted to get other artist/producer's opinion on something.
 
So myself and my rhythm guitarist have come to somewhat of a disagreement regarding implementing strings in some.of our alt. Rock based songs. The music is heavily layered, with up to 15-20 tracks used for guitars alone.
 
Reason being is it is it has a very wide range and depth of sound especially from the higher end (lead melodies, patterns etc). Anyway, although I'm the drummer I've been writing digital orchestration for over 10 years now so like to think I've got a good idea of what works or not. 
 
After many many hours tinkering with these tracks I've come to the conclusion that there is just too much going on with them. There is always rhythm and always a lead melody/pattern overlayed, often with other themes sat back on it giving the tracks a full body. 
 
After explaining this to him, he is still adamant that strings need to be in and that they will work its just because they aren't mixed etc. I am of the mindset that if it clashes and sounds bad premix (with some sound balancing to be sure) then it won't sound good mixed down, since mixing isn't some sort of cureall. 
 
Am I wrong in saying a track can be drowned with melody? That with so many layers of guitars strings just clash on a musical and aural level? 
 
What's people's thoughts on this? Am I being too negative or can too much melody kill a track?

Depends whether you're going for a wall of sound type track. With an extremely busy mix I think there's some point at which you have to forget about perfect instrument separation.

Listen to A Song For The Lovers by Richard Ashcroft - lots going on in that arrangement including lush strings. It sounds kind of muddy and cluttered but I love it.

Just guessing, not having heard the tune, but spectral masking is a big challenge when using orchestration in hard rock and metal genres. When you're layering elements with similar spectral content, you've got to decide which one's going to be the dominant element at any point and not be afraid to back everything else off.
 
Here are a couple examples of how (IMO) it's done right: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaEY7Z3QsOA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIVDEA0Edis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8gXzDLNWl8
 
So much going on in those, but the guitars and orchestra each stake out their space and leave the other alone. It's not just EQ and balance, but also in the arrangements. Note that often when the guitars are chunky the strings are sustained; when the guitars are fat and sustained, the strings chug. Then the come together and play basically the same parts for the big accents.
 
 
 
 
 

Here's another take, less guitar oriented but great examples of build/release with lotsa layers
I can't get enough of the post-rock stuff.  Go to youtube and search post-rock.  I wish I could do this stuff so I could tell you how
 

 
 

bitflipper has nailed it - it's all about arrangement and EQ.
 
We do a lot of orchestration work in my band and if you listen to the orchestra by itself, it's actually quite thin for the most part. When the heavy guitars, bass and kick drums are present, you're gonna fight a losing battle trying to put in the lower strings or brass. You can get away with timpani accents and things like that if you use them sparingly though. Any gaps in the main arrangement are great places to put that kind of thing back in though since you have a sonic space to fit them in.
 
But if you must have a full orchestral arrangement in your main mix, you'll definitely be wanting to high-pass the hell out of it to make it all slot in properly. I'd be far more inclined to write a more suitable part, though, because EQing will never quite be as good in context.
 
EDIT: A good example is this from about 5:26: 
 
https://youtu.be/-spybnQV8LA?t=5m26s
 
Lots of stuff going on but nothing stepping on the low end.
 

Silly of me not to link some of your stuff, LT. Your band's material offers great examples of extremely dense mixes that work. I've been meaning to ask you if you do the mixing yourself.

Yeah, I'm the demo / arrange / record / edit / mix / master guy in the band, so albums tend to be pretty damn exhausting for me! HAHA!
 
Your examples are great though - Nightwish has immaculate production. Actually TOO immaculate for me in some ways because it's just so... perfect, I think it loses a bit of the edge that rock / metal needs. Seriously impressive live though. We've done a couple of tours with those guys and standing there in the audience when their backing track with their orchestra comes blasting in is just incredible!

Would love to catch them live. They've only played here once, and to my regret I didn't make the effort to go. It was raining. They were playing a small venue, not being the big draw here that they are in Northern Europe. Hopefully, they'll give Seattle another go. I won't miss them next time.
 
Reminds me of the time I passed on going to see the Beatles. Yeh, right? It was because they were charging 5 dollars with no opening act, at a time when most concerts were $2 and had at least a half-dozen acts. Maybe next year, I thought. But they never came back.

bitflipper
 
Reminds me of the time I passed on going to see the Beatles. Yeh, right? It was because they were charging 5 dollars with no opening act, at a time when most concerts were $2 and had at least a half-dozen acts. Maybe next year, I thought. But they never came back.

You remind me of the time (~1965-66) when my sister gets to go see The Beatles with our cousin in Chicago. I was the huge Beatles fan and my sister barely cared for them (then) but was thrilled to go with our "older" cousin. I am 5 years younger than my cousin. She was NEVER going to ask me to go.
 
So, I too never got to see them.
 
I did get to see Ringo's All Start Band (Jack Bruce was with him that year). And in 2002 I got see Macca.
 

layering should always serve the song,
not the other way around.