Embrace it.
Not taking it personally, just analyzed that you’re overlooking multiple aspects based on a short YouTube clip which simply showcases technical potential without exploration of the variabilities likely needed to dial in a final result. I’m hardly impressed by any music I hear used to showcase a DAW or a guitar performance showcasing a pedal, it typically sounds like royalty free music which it probably is - that doesn’t stop me from understanding the technical capabilities of the DAW or pedal and how I could utilize them. As someone who has used the software extensively, you’re blatantly overlooking some pretty obvious aspects and audio engineering philosophy here. If I had had this software with this particular feature 10 years ago when working on some very poor live recording mixes, these utilities likely would have helped me get at least a %10 better result, if not %50, but the %10 would have been worth the cost of the software - the end result might still not be great because of the source material being less than optimum - but better is better however slightly.
You’re looking at the feature as a sole-process finished result - it’s not necessarily. Almost none of the tools I use for deep sound-design for film get final results on their own.
How does my edit rest your case? I’m simply helping you by pointing out you’re looking at it wrong, maybe don’t take it personally and take a step back and give yourself an opportunity to rethink your approach and consensus and that might benefit you in your studio work.
chow for now.