Lol. I'll take that as a big compliment. My recent controversial take is not dismissing anyone's experience. I'm just giving a different perspective on the matter which is, you're blaming the wrong thing. I'm just disagreeing what you are blaming, but I am agreeing on what you are hearing. Lol. I've been on both side, stock vs tweaked and my contribution is to give perspective on how to understand one's chain.
My previous controversial take was how people think their top measurbating device is so transparent that they can hear the error in the recordings. Its funny right? You are so convinced your stack is so transparent that any anomaly has to be the track, not the device. My take is, I've been there, I don't claim my stack was transparent enough to hear the error in the tracks but I WAS seemingly hearing errors/mistake in the track. I would initially say it was a bad master where the micing,take or mixing had a mistake. But over years of upgrades, those 'mistakes' went away. So joke's on me. Now, I still stand my ground there is practically no mistakes in these albums I listen to, aside from the obvious brush of the mic. But the issue of limiters is becoming more obvious in giving me fatigue vs compression and the more transparent and smooth the chain is, the more fatiguing it can be. Thing is.... engineers use limiters a lot.
Point being, there's a healthy amount of mid-fi, hi-fi consumers using collective/community note sharing and research because of some conspiracy thinking the manufacturers are out to get them. I used to have that stance since I believed the narrative of the forums, but I'm here to say most of the time people are blaming the wrong thing.