> Otherwise, we should probably credit Ableton and a bunch of synth plug-ins for pretty much every preset used on almost every dance track made now... If there

> Otherwise, we should probably credit Ableton and a bunch of synth plug-ins for pretty much every preset used on almost every dance track made now... If there is one easily identifiable preset that is present in literally hundreds of songs, I'm not sure why it should be so offensive to recognize it as an innovation in itself. For example, the DX7 electric piano preset, the "Lately bass" on the TX81Z (which in turn was obviously inspired by the bass sound in a Janet Jackson song), or The Ultimate Soundtracker, of which derivatives have been used for literally tens of thousands of songs. I don't see how recognizing the influence of these things is somehow disrespectful or that the recognition somehow discredits all the other innovation involved. As an extreme example, can't I say that the TB-303 revolutionized house music without discrediting artists like Phuture? To recognize that the technology was important and influential is somehow the same thing as saying that the artists and their ingenuity and innovation is not? Because I think the syrup is important, I'm ignoring or discrediting the pancakes?