@freemo I really dig @TDL99's response. I'm an armchair "I'm into lots of different stuff, nothing too deep" guy.

I watch RIck Beato, a former music producer as he discusses "what makes this song great?" or other various music related topics.

https://youtu.be/6IV29YNTH3M How Auto-Tune DESTROYED Popular Music is one such. This also relates to "beats." According to Beato, having the players not quite be on the same beat preserves the humanity of the work. The slight variance of timing, the "not quite 120 bpm" and so on reflect on the ears as, "this was made by humans, not machines." For Beato, one of the current trends of using digital tracks to force notes to be on a precise beat is sucking the humanity out of the work, and he will provide examples of really great songs, but the artist isn't *quite* on the beat... and in the process making the music more interesting, more emotional, more compelling.

Listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZAkqukvfSE and try to find the precision of beats. Everything isn't quite 100% locked into a beat, but DAMN the raw, naked emotion of the song comes out in just that tiny bit off. It's the room for the humanity to come through.

https://youtu.be/zTX1VyHiBJg with the Professor of Rock gives us the story by the drummer of how he screwed up the beat going into the song, "Low Rider." He kept going anyway, and everyone else jumped in like it was nothing KNOWING he screwed it up. And out of the screw-up came a great masterpiece. TDL99, despite being humbly "I'm not qualified" is WAY more qualified than I am. But between Rick Beato and Adam Reader of Professor of Rock, I get the idea "it depends," but also "using a machine to lock the beat suck the humanity out of the music."

For what it's worth. :) Thank you for this opportunity for me to share what I get to experience listening to these guys.