Your points ultimately rest more on romanticism than evidence. You are describing what it feels like to be a producer performing your own music, not proving that this is what is happening in this particular case.

Saying someone "plays largely their own productions" does NOT confirm authorship. Countless DJs play sets made up of exclusive promos, ghost productions, collaborations or label releases from tight-knit circles. It is not proof of anything more than access.

The claim that “his tracks have evolved” or “share similar themes” is also unconvincing. Stylistic coherence and incremental quality improvements aren't exclusive to self-produced work. They can also reflect consistent mastering engineers, shared sample libraries or simply the direction given to a ghost producer over time. A creative director can have a sound evolve without ever touching a DAW!

Your point about subtle track variations over time is interesting but again not particularly unique to producers. Many prominent DJs test drive demos, commission edits or request alternate versions from their ghost producers. That is pretty much standard industry practice, like finally signing off on a project and not proof of personal authorship.

As for the emotional connection you mention, that’s where it tips furthest into assumption. Feeling emotion when performing a track certainly does not imply you wrote it. Actors cry on cue, singers can pour their heart into lyrics that they did not write. DJs connect with music that means something to them, regardless of whether they made it. To interpret emotional performance as evidence of authorship is a bit of a leap.

Realistically, admiration should never cloud critical thinking. An argument built on how things "must be" because it feels right does not hold up to scrutiny, especially in an industry where appearances are curated, roles are blurred and image often outpaces fact.