Throughout this discussion, it dawned on me that it may be worth it to take a step back, and pose the question:
What constitutes the use of a preset, specifically, to you?
When I think of "using a preset", I am typically talking about using anything other than init patch as the basis for sound design. So the definition of a preset could be a sound other than init that came on the synth from the factory, via another soundbank, or even a patch that I have saved as part of a previous sound design session (regardless of whether it started as an init patch or not).
So, in my current day workflow, I very regularly use something other than init patch as a starting point for tweaking. It rarely ends up sounding anything remotely like the raw material I started from. In addition to sculpting the sound via synthesis (oscillators/filters/env/modulation), by the time I run it through EQ and FX there is guaranteed to be no part of that sound which would be recognizable to the original sound designer (even if I am the original sound designer).
I can think of a few occasions when I did in fact use presets as-is. In my early 20s, a friend of mine who was fascinated by my gear and music making hobby would come over and we would throw together some cheesy/fun novelty tracks. One synth I had at the time was the Yamaha TX81Z, and because of the crappy panel editing as it relates to FM synth programming, it was not rare to just settle on one of the presets. I remember the patch named Lately Bass distinctly, because it was such a recognizable bass sound, yet so much could be done with it; it is now regarded as a iconic patch that reguarly gets recreated on other synths (sometimes faithfully, other times not so much), and many popular tracks were made with that bass preset.
But in general, now a preset is merely a starting point for me. The end product is never very close to the original sound.
More food for thought -- for those familiar with genetic patch creation and morphing of editors like the Soundtower and Codeknobs editors, does creating mutations of existing patches fall under the category of using presets? By that, I mean let's say I take a pad that I like from a third party sound bank, another pad from the factory presets, generate a hundred or so offspring mutants by making a few curated parameter range choices, then choose 1 or 2 of the best of and save it.
Does that constitute relying on presets? And where is the line begin and end between preset reliance and effective use of technology?