That was one of those British “Oh sorry” which means You misunderstood me… though on reflection, that seems rude to
@Pete Effamy , for whom I have great respect, so now I really am sorry
Nice of you to say, but as
@Keep Blowing said, absolutely nothing to apologise for and it wasn't at all disrespectful.
I appreciate the flip side of the argument, not suppressing creativity from the individual. My side of the argument comes from the belief that most of the time as players we are in a situation with a job that is laid out for us and we should bear this (humbly) in mind. With almost all music there needs to be a degree of conformity or it becomes something else, something that it was not billed as.
Classical musicians have the greatest obligation to conform. Within 5% or 10% you make the same sound as everyone else and play as everyone has done before. That's the joy and challenge of it. You re-create with respect to the composer, the genre and the listener who has come along knowing that they will hear what they want to hear.
Other forms of music demand less conformity, probably far less. I have no idea what a concert of 0% conformity would look or sound like. Perhaps it wouldn't even be in the venue advertised! But that's all in musical taste, and I'm certainly not criticising that.
Often non-conformity leads to a new style or re-defining of a style. This usually requires that the other instrumentalists adapt their playing too, otherwise there is a maverick sound within the band that doesn't fit, unless the level of un-conformity is handled in a clever way and hasn't merely gone off on a tangent.
For me, music is my master and my employer. Occasionally in the studio, I am the creator and master.