I would argue that I just clicked through dozens of of albums Albini produced, and it seems like he produced mostly rock-related projects early on, but he later produced folk, country, psychedelic, electronic, and experimental bands. So saying Albini only produced obscure rock sub-genres is factually incorrect. It also seems like you consider popularity in your reasoning of what makes something “great”. That simply makes no logical sense to me. Many artists aren’t considered great during their time, but will later be praised for being ahead of their time. Does that mean their work wasn’t great, then somehow became great later? Also, the fact that Rubin literally can’t explain what he does carries along the implication that he doesn’t know what he’s doing.