You can find a TL;DR at the end.
Some users suggest that previous research before asking a question is a must. I don't think it should be a must, but I do agree that it enriches the question, it provides many benefits, and it should be encouraged (but not required or enforced). Even SE admins seem to have different opinions on this, and I've been linked to both sides of the coin through admin's meta posts, blogs, podcasts, etc.
With that in mind, I stumbled upon this question:
The original closer (the first to vote close), which has now deleted all his comments, commented that he was closing because of "lack of previous research". He also said that the answer "could be found in the second link of a google search" (which then became obvious that was not true), and that the definitive answer to that question was "Music maker record one track at a time.(if I am not wrong)", that was what the second link said. He then deleted the comments because "he already did more effort than the asker" (he deleted that comment too some time after). You can also find my replies to those claims in the comments.
After doing some research myself, including the manual, and knowing a thing or two about DAWs (I make a living out of them), I found no definitive answer to his question. I did found that one person saying "I think you can't", the same the original closer was referencing, but that's it.
"I think you can't" is not a definitive answer, and it's the only one that can be found through previous research. There are many obscure software out there, a lot of which is poorly documented. That shouldn't be a reason to prohibit questions focusing on that software. I think it's the contrary, a very good reason to come here and ask those questions, making the potential answer available to other people. Isn't it the very goal and definition of SE?
Knowing this, is too far-fetched to think that the asker in fact did previous research but found no good answers to his question?
So, why are we closing that question? (and potentially will close more on similar scenarios, which is why I'm trying to bring attention to this). We already stablished that in this case previous research is fruitless, so what else are we expecting from that question?
A second issue I find here is that the closers choose "off topic" as the reason. There is no close reason for lack of research, and I wasn't aware it was one.
So, in short, I have these questions/observations:
Why are we closing questions because of lack research, when there is no definitive answer to find from that research, when the research is fruitless? Not finding answers elsewhere shouldn't prohibit us from asking questions here. It doesn't make sense.
Why are we closing questions because of lack of research at all? Downvote it, comment on it, avoid the question; sure, I understand that. But closing it? Is it justified? Is that what we want to do now?
If we are closing questions because of lack of previous research, why are we doing it just to a few select ones? Most of the questions asked here do not share previous research. In fact a very small fraction of them do. Yet this is brought as a complain and /or close reason in a few selected cases. In this specific case it comes from people that don't know or understand the subject (you can see who voted to close in the vote history). This is fine, not knowing is fine, but it is also a good reason to avoid including lack of research as an enforced dynamic, as a close reason. Often the closers will have no way to correctly judge the research and results available, which I think was the case here.
If we make "lack of research" an official close reason, we should include it as an official reason in the close section, something you can select when voting to close a question. If not, we as a community and the mods should make it clear that it is not a close reason to prevent further confusion.