Ok I'm no expert on this...well I know all the theory.  Danny is right, no rules! If you want to learn about doubling guitars research the masters...Brian May is a good place to start, Jimmy Page, Hendrix won't see you wrong. 
 
Acoustic is another matter...try Marc Bolan and his early Tyrannosaurus Rex stuff, Wind Quartet, Dwarven Trumpet Blues...yep that's the title of the song.  Life's an Elevator off his (T-Rex) Futuristic Dragon album is fantastic...makes me cry...1976 so he's in his cocaine blues and failed in America stage...and his wife is about to kill him by driving into a tree-funny for a man who wrote songs about cars and he could not drive.
 
Also try doubler effects, I'm using Waves Doubler at the moment...love this for strings, and I'm about to experiment with voice.  There is also the ADT Abbey Road emulator, which I must get.
 
Experiment...I suppose is the key.
 
Ben 

i posted an example of these techniques in the song forums

I recently found Melodyne useful for doubling guitars. Its ultra fast, go for it when you don't have time, your guitar goes out of tune quickly, you want to use inspiration for something else or any other reason.
 
Clone track --> make melodyne region --> quantize c.70-80% --> hard pan original and melodynized track --> done.

Danny Danzi
Hi Beeps,
 

Howdy. Sorry for the late reply. I've actually been in the middle of doing some work that directly relates to this topic so the timing couldn't be better. Very helpful as always.
 
I guess the big thing is I guess it may be part laziness on my part (as in creating an even more insane amount of takes than I already do) but I also do get concerned about too many performances piling up. Getting identical takes isn't really a problem performancewise for me but I get worried about losing some edge/clarity no matter how minute BUT there really is nothing stopping me from just making sure I have enough takes to truly double each and every part. So in the scenario I described above there would be two full takes of the Full on version to be panned left/right and two full takes of the more reserved "helper" tracks. Then if it gets too hectic in the mix having all that going on (and all the other tracks because really those four tracks are actually just ONE guitar part of what could be a three or four guitar part orchestration: Basic rhythm, Lead rhythm, Rhythmic "Lead" and then the actual solos.) I can just decide to drop some doubles where needed.
 
That's what happened with Beepster Creep. Too many doubled guits overpowering everything else but that was also one of my first projects in Sonar and was really kind of half assed as far as writing and tracking.
 
Anyway, thanks for the response. Making me think as always and I'm sure I'm not the only one (I would have tagged your post as Helpful but someone already beat me too it so there ya go).
 
Take care, bud and good luck with all you have going on. I'm sure once you get through this little wobbly patch you'll be rockin' harder than ever.
 
Cheers.

Afrodrum
I recently found Melodyne useful for doubling guitars. Its ultra fast, go for it when you don't have time, your guitar goes out of tune quickly, you want to use inspiration for something else or any other reason.
 
Clone track --> make melodyne region --> quantize c.70-80% --> hard pan original and melodynized track --> done.

I've FINALLY gotten around to trying out the included Melodyne and have had similar ideas for single note lead parts.
 
However to extend it to other stuff (I love doing big crazy rich chordal work to the point I consider my rhythms to be almost lead parts) I think I'd have to do the upgrade to Melodyne Editor... and that's a pricey ticket even with the Sonar discount.
 
The new Vocal Align tool in Sonar Platinum looks promising for various guitar shenanigans in theory (because it it has the variable alignment control so you could not just align separate tracks but UN-align a clone track) but based on a few reports around here it isn't honed all that great for guitar.
 
There has been some alluding by the Baker's in regards to how they might tweak the algorithms to dial in to thing sother than just vocals. So maybe we'll end up with some guitar/bass presets and or new dedicated align tools.
 
Of course I can even try out V-Align yet because again I can drop the coin yet however I will at some point and I'm gonna twist that bugger up. lol

Nothing wrong with creating parts Beeps. The laziness thing, well, lol...unfortunately you won't get all the results you want if you don't physically record the tracks. Also, back to the orchestra thing....you can also play rhythm parts the way you would in the song and then play them an octave up. I did that on a cover piece for a client. I can send it to you if you want to hear it. But I think you get the idea. You can even dub in some single notes high and low back there that just fill things out the right way. Just keep thinking orchestra and don't be afraid to play the parts. Just remember they have to fit in the mix and this means special care to eq as well as how they all compliment the mix. Compressing heavier in some areas and lighter in other will also help solidify the layers. Hope this helps. :)
 
-Danny

Yeah, no problem creating octaved, fifthed, thirds, whatever parts. I'm all over that but it's that complete wall of guits overtaking my drums and bass (which I've had problems with in the past... go nuts on the guits and then all of a sudden everything else disappears).
 
And I listen to recordings where it seems the guits sound like a single track or maybe a doubled track but are just so wide and powerful. I guess really that's what I'm trying to do on my own stuff and will just require some experience/skill and likely proper gear.
 
The laziness thing is more about having to meticulous go through match/comp the takes. I love playing it. Checking, matching and editing is boring and lame though. Heheh... I'm sure you understand.
 
I'm forcing myself to actually just hang out in my DAW room during the day now instead of it being some kind of specific journey into musicland so I'm experimenting more.
 
Anyway... I've got something new cookin' that I'll hopefully have mixed and ready maybe in the next couple weeks. I'll be sure to post it for you (and everyone on the forum) to analyze.
 
Cheers, Danny.
 
Oh and sorry for the semi threadjack, Monkey. Some great advice bouncing around here though.

Beeps, the problem you are having with the guitars mixing with drums etc depends on your eq and compression. What you're experiencing is the lack of compression and some frequency masking. Any time you find a bunch of instruments competing, it's just about always frequency masking and a need for more compression.
 
Compression keeps things tight as you know. This way nothing lashes out. I know you know this, but it's important to know how to compress these types of sounds because you need more than you might normally use. So much so, you're looking at being right near the edge to where it pumps and breathes. As soon as it does that, you back it down until the artifact goes away. 4:1 to 6:1 ratio depending on the sound.
 
Watch eq's here...especially low end. If you ever hear a compressor kicking on you, before you adjust that compressor, check to see if you have excessive low end ramping the compressor up. 8 times out of 10 we can control a guitar sound by simply high passing it and removing the low end push. This is huge! Guitars (as well as bass guitar) have less bass in them than you think. The low end you hear in a mix is the sum of the kick, the bass and the guitars. Nothing really has any excessive low end in it unless you are using bass drops or effects of that nature.
 
In a layering sense, the more compression you can use (as long as you don't hear artifacts) the cooler it will sound. One thing you will realize when you have it right is...you will NEVER drown out your drums or anything else. Meaning, you can make your guitars louder where you will hear the drums need to come up, but you will not make it so that the drums disappear and are inaudible.
 
The above last sentence holds a crap load of weight and should be observed by everyone. Masking makes instruments disappear. Proper eq and compression will NEVER make an instrument disappear. You will always hear every nuance even though the instrument may appear too low level wise.
 
This was one thing that taught me about a good mix. I had the chance to hear some professional multi-tracks from some of the friends I have in high places. They gave me these multi-tracks to familiarize myself with what good tracks sound like. What I noticed was, no matter how loud I made an instrument, I never lost anything from the others. There's a difference between being too low and being too masked.
 
Anytime you have to keep reaching for a fader, and then reaching for the other to hear it...then the one that you touched before, you are dealing with masking. When you have your eq curve right on your instruments, compression can be used in moderation. That said, if you need to use the compression for effect purposes, you REALLY gain ground here because the instruments are already where they need to be. The compression stops the transients from going astray which tightens up the mix, keeps everything audible and allows you an even louder mix if need be. So keep some of this in mind also. :)
 
Looking forward to hearing what you're working on...make sure to share something with us when you are ready. :)
 
-Danny

That is actually very interesting, Danny. As I read and read and read and read I keep seeing people say how compression should be used as little as possible but now I think I might be understanding where that is coming from. That is being said (perhaps) because people are experiencing that unwanted compression because the track is hitting it the wrong way (like getting whomped by the low end making it useless on the mids and highs where it is actually needed).
 
This I think is exactly the issue for my stuff and I've been dialing back my compression so that things are barely being touched... and really now that I'm getting better signals and I'm a little better at EQing/setting up my virtual signal chain in the DAW/setting my levels right/using better sim tones/etc things have been getting a lot better sounding... BUT it ain't quite where I want it.
 
I guess this is the next level. Completely micromanaging what frequencies are hitting what, when, where and how. I'm actually reviewing a lot of my notes and the various instructional material I've acquired over the past few years to make sense of it all. It's soooo much stuff and I knew so very little when I started even though I got the general gist of it all the finer (and even medium) details and nuances slipped past.
 
And I guess I did know what you are referring to on some level and it makes total sense (of course) but that is somewhat of a paradigm shifting statement for me. I will now start making even more of a pointed effort to sift and sort frequencies which I've mostly been doing only in context of what was hitting the busses. I was not REALLY considering what was hitting the various processors and effects in my virtual track strips.
 
So yeah... gonna keep a better eye on where my EQ is in the chain and what it is feeding and how.
 
Thanks.

Danny Danzi
The above last sentence holds a crap load of weight and should be observed by everyone. Masking makes instruments disappear. Proper eq and compression will NEVER make an instrument disappear. You will always hear every nuance even though the instrument may appear too low level wise.
 
-Danny

I almost started a thread last night called...."I MISS Danny".  Then I spotted a couple that you have rescently posted in.  This is always such valuable info for me.  Thank you brother for the info that you share so graciously.