sharke
I'm going to have to disagree with Beepster on the panning issue - all a matter of personal preference of course but I really like to pan things hard left or right as part of an LCR strategy. I just find it gives the track more width and leaves more space in the middle for the kick, bass and vocal (and anything else you want upfront). 

I guess there's loads of things you can do to differentiate the two sides and make them sound wider. Try using different pickup positions for instance - one with the neck, one with the bridge. You can also use opposite EQ curves on each part - for instance, a boost of 1kHz on the left complimented by a cut in 1kHz on the right. If you're sending them to a stereo bus and using an EQ that allows for L/R processing (for instance Waves Renaissance EQ) then this is very easy to do. Then of course you can try putting an effect like subtle flange on one side, or even put flange on both but use different (but related) modulation rates on each. This is in addition to what Beepster said about different tones (use different amp sims etc). 

Yeah, I should have really emphasized that for the most part I'm doing really hi gain stuff which may be why that sounds a little better to me. The guitars just sound a little fatter and more focused. Could be I'm mixing through headphones too. When I have them panned hard right/left it always sounds like they are an afterthought yelling at me from behind instead of walloping me in the face. It would probably be a lot different too if I was adding vocals where I'd want the centered left a little bit more open. I may end up automating stuff so that when I want attention on the vox/leads/melody I hard pan then bring it back to 70/70 when there is nothing going on in the middle.
 
I consider my rhythm guits as kind of something to be showcased like a lead track too instead of as a backing instrument.
 
IDK... still learning so anything I say should really be taken with a grain of salt.

Beepster

sharke
I'm going to have to disagree with Beepster on the panning issue - all a matter of personal preference of course but I really like to pan things hard left or right as part of an LCR strategy. I just find it gives the track more width and leaves more space in the middle for the kick, bass and vocal (and anything else you want upfront). 

I guess there's loads of things you can do to differentiate the two sides and make them sound wider. Try using different pickup positions for instance - one with the neck, one with the bridge. You can also use opposite EQ curves on each part - for instance, a boost of 1kHz on the left complimented by a cut in 1kHz on the right. If you're sending them to a stereo bus and using an EQ that allows for L/R processing (for instance Waves Renaissance EQ) then this is very easy to do. Then of course you can try putting an effect like subtle flange on one side, or even put flange on both but use different (but related) modulation rates on each. This is in addition to what Beepster said about different tones (use different amp sims etc). 

Yeah, I should have really emphasized that for the most part I'm doing really hi gain stuff which may be why that sounds a little better to me. The guitars just sound a little fatter and more focused. Could be I'm mixing through headphones too. When I have them panned hard right/left it always sounds like they are an afterthought yelling at me from behind instead of walloping me in the face. It would probably be a lot different too if I was adding vocals where I'd want the centered left a little bit more open. I may end up automating stuff so that when I want attention on the vox/leads/melody I hard pan then bring it back to 70/70 when there is nothing going on in the middle.
 
I consider my rhythm guits as kind of something to be showcased like a lead track too instead of as a backing instrument.
 
IDK... still learning so anything I say should really be taken with a grain of salt.

I hear you about listening to hard panned instruments through cans. Sometimes it can sound a little extreme. But there are things you can do to rectify this, like for instance sending each side to a mono reverb hard panned to the other side (or in the middle). Or if you're adding delays to a hard panned part, hard pan the delay to the opposite side. It's amazing to think that some of the most classic records of all time are mixed LCR. It does require a different approach though.

I'm almost ashamed to admit it but reverb and delay settings/routing/panning/techniques/etc are something that still REALLY confuse the heck out of me. I never really liked reverb/delay at ALL in my live days so I just totally ignored all that stuff but now obviously I need it to create "space" on my mixes. Usually I just end up finding a preset that isn't too offensive to me and/or looking for a good "room" setting then use the dry/wet knob or sends to a bus. Really fiddling with the reverb itself though just bends my brain.
 
I just need to do some dedicated studying on the subject but yanno... so many things to learn with limited time. No excuse though. I'm sure there are plenty of vids and articles kicking around about this.

Some great advice.
Definitely know your parts. 
Slightly different tone on each track is essential.
And I am in line with Beepster. I tend to pan doubled guitars in the 40-70% range.
I generally run a lead down the middle.
I like to spread the instruments across the stereo field to give each its own sonic space.
This is an example of those ideas:
http://forum.cakewalk.com/I-dont-careMix-5New-m3141972.aspx
Go to Mix 5. 

I'm  struggling to get a mix dialed in that contains 4 guitar parts playing simultaneously.  Three are played with same guitar and the other electric.  Some parts just sound messy to the point  that I will likekly resort to automation to pull a couple out all together on some notes. I find so far, hard panning gives a better result so far.

1st question to ask:
 
do you really need all 4 parts?
maybe one acoustic, and one electric,
is all you really need.
 
 
it's a production and arrangement question,
not really a mix question.

batsbrew
1st question to ask:
 
do you really need all 4 parts?
maybe one acoustic, and one electric,
is all you really need.
 
 
it's a production and arrangement question,
not really a mix question.

Good question.  I did not arrange. The song was one some students I worked with wrote that day and I recorded. I warned them I may need to cut some parts so I doubt they would be upset if all 4 parts did not work.. Preliminary  mix seems to confirm that but I admittedly don't  have much experience trying to make three tracks of the exact same guitar sit in a mix and figured it might just be me.  The electric cuts through nicely so that is a keeper. 

This has probably been mentioned above, but I got some good advice soon after joining this forum that crunchy double tracked elec guitar will sound a lot more powerful when finally mixed if you roll off about half the distortion you think you need.
 
I've also found it helps to double track using different chord inversions per track.

dubdisciple
I'm  struggling to get a mix dialed in that contains 4 guitar parts playing simultaneously.  Three are played with same guitar and the other electric.  Some parts just sound messy to the point  that I will likekly resort to automation to pull a couple out all together on some notes. I find so far, hard panning gives a better result so far.

Any chance some Audiosnap tightening might pull it together a bit? A little can do a lot. It is a pain though so it's a matter of how much effort you are will to toss into the project.

Beepster, you may be right. Tighter synching may solve some issues. It's  a good learning experience