I agree, the timing is way too tight, only master level musicians can approach it. Though they can.
Having grown up listening, and producing, rock music, and related forms, I find the rigid timing of EDM to be unpleasant. Except for occasional dancing, where it seems to work well.
So I don't see it as "correct" timing, just a different feel.
There was a real shift once the music started being produced in the computer, and you could repeat, bit for bit, chunks of audio.
This contrasts heavily with a lot of the best Hip-Hop production of the 90s. I'm thinking of groups like Public Enemy. Because of the nature of the production tools, the timing on their sample based music is inherently "loose."
I have a theory that part of what makes music/art interesting is the ability to perceive how an artist engaged with the limitations of their medium.
Prior to DAWs, having music that was precise, and had precise repetition was hard. Artists often did try, and achieve, some very tight productions, but it was an effort. The effort happens at a boundary, which is what allows us to perceive it.
Now, instead of being hard, getting music to be precise, and to repeat sections exactly, is trivial. There's no challenge to inherently make sound repeat anymore. So it's easy to wind up with loop based music that is super boring, because it lacks the needed variation to keep it interesting. The more interesting producers of various flavors of EDM grapple with this challenge directly, and it is upon this boundary that we, the listener, can share in their expression!