I like to use both as for me anyway they produce different results.
Not sure which I prefer but good thing about recording a master out in one take is that’s it finished, apart from some mastering or tweaking. that can have its good and bad points though
I dont multi track anymore. Not for about 5 years.
Prior to that I did. Starting with 4 track tapes in the 90s.
Now I prefer a single take stereo recording from my mixer. It sounds better and its more enjoyable.
same
Those with modern Elektrons need not choose. Record the stereo outs at the same time as the individual tracks with Overbridge. Go with whatever option sounds best 
Since making tunes with the Octatrack, I’ve mostly gone back to my stereo recording roots (originally did this with an MPC and a mixer, recording direct to a CD-RW deck, in 1999).
@Fin25 is right. It takes a lot of practice. I wouldn’t do it if I wasn’t pleased with the results. I switched to Multitrack in 2004 because I needed the safety net to improve my output quality. Now that I have more experience I don’t need the net.
And I ain’t as techno famous as I once was. 
I’m not famous but I record multiple devices in one take on a Stereo Track. Live Performances and Improvisations are the way for me.
Aphex Twin on Syro. He was particularly referring to xmas_eve10 in an interview
Mike Parker has stated in interviews that he records straight to stereo.
Ezbot on YT said he records to 2 track.
Digiboxes>OT>Analogue Heat>DAW
So how did major lablel artists spend $1,000,000 and 18 months in the studio to record an album?
Major studio’s charge $500,000 per channel and take about 9 months to find the record button for each one.
Drugs
And hookers on drugs.
I do stereo on occasion depending on what kinds of IO I’m working with, etc.
Honestly though, the Bluebox just made everything so ridiculously easy to multitrack, that I just use it most of the time now.
I record my effects loops 100% wet to two of its channels, record raw stems, then touch everything up in Reaper, Ozone, and occasionally some Eventide plugins.
That said, depending on your goals, you can do stereo recording and make it sound excellent. As mentioned above, it takes a little practice to get everything right. Once you have it down though, it’s ALMOST set and forget (at least across the same or similar musical genres).
One of my favorite setups was a Digitakt and Digitone, one running through the other depending on which set of effects I wanted. Then record the output in stereo. In fact, it was hard to make it sound bad.
No choice at one point in history, assuming they wanted to be taken seriously by a record label.
Oh, and yes, hookers and drugs cost money!
Pretty much most electronic dance music from early 90’s to late 90’s was recorded to stereo DAT, at least as far as everyone who I knew was doing it, digital multitrack recording wasn’t very affordable or needed, for the most part.
I sometimes watch modern music production videos, where people are using ableton or whatever, and it strikes me how different people tend to work today, lots of browsing folders for samples or synths, very quick drawing in notes, copying and pasting etc. It looks very boring to me, and I think had music been made like that when I started out it would not have interested me. I have not changed much how I work since starting out, I like hardware and a more visceral and tangible experience, I’m not against using computers, but they only play a minor role, either sample editing or final mastering/edits.
Ultimately finding the workflow which allows you to enjoy and be productive is key, whatever route that takes. If the music is good I don’t care how it is made.
Really didn’t realise how many people recorded straight to a stereo mix! Making me reconsider getting a blue box a mixer at all…
I wonder if it comes down to the intended audience and the outlet a bit. I’ve watched tons of YT videos of producers doing sound design and arrangement sessions and they spend hours poring over a single snare drum hit or fiddling with chains of plugins so the bass sounds “perfect”. I guess if you’re trying to make your living from releasing music in certain genres and you’re having to make it sound pristine, perfectly mixed and able to compete for space on Spotify as well as sound good in a massive club sound system then perhaps all that extra work is necessary.
On the other hand, if you want to make niche techno music to self-release to a smaller audience on Bandcamp then perhaps it doesn’t matter so much. I mean no disrespect to techno or those producers, I just mean that the audience may have different expectations. If they’re trying to support smaller artists, be part of a small community and mainly listen at home on a modest system or with a pair of apple earbuds, then perhaps that last 10% of mixing/mastering perfection isn’t essential.
Just a theory!
i got back into writing tracks, and doing it DAWless (1) because that’s how I learned how to sequence back when the closest thing to a DAW was the Atari-ST, so learning how to do the same thing in Logic at a professional level will probably take me an inordinate amount of time; and (2) even if I could master a DAW workflow quickly I personally hate the way DAW tracks sound, sonically, compared to pre-DAW records. fully expect to work more at the level of mixing in a board to get it right versus trying to perfect it all in Logic so it seems six or 1/2 dozen the other to me at this point. i don’t think it’s an excuse for a crappier sounding finished product, but i definitely don’t want it to sound like it ended up coming out of a DAW either, as an aesthetic choice
