More opinion: I was reading the bad crits of this recording again and was again struck by how petty and really ill-informed they were. First of all this is considered the absolute epitome of Bach's keyboard output and extremely demanding to play...requiring years of keyboard mastery to attempt it. It is long, very difficult and has to be played in one go, from memory, in order to capture the sweep and intricacy of Bach's genius. Bach was considered an inspiring and awesome musician at the time. He most certainly would have been bewildered and unhappy at the idea of playing his, or any work, from rote, mechanically, slavishly. All the more so as it was considered a sign of good musicianship to embroider, to improvise, in short to interpret...not copy what the teacher or master had done. He would never have encouraged any pupil who tried to be a clone. He certainly would have had his own way of playing the Variations and an over-all view of how they should be heard, but I doubt that was meant to be set in stone. The score is a matrix, not a commandment. I find Verlet's recording breathtaking, not only because of the obvious technicity, but how she both interprets the score and lets the music interpret her; symbiosis. It breaths, ebbs and flows, unfolds, explains, captures and reveals what is both a "mathematical" jewel and a highly spiritually charged statement. It is both awesomely intricate and utterly transparent. I don't believe she takes any liberties but just adds her personality to the mix. Certainly if you listen to Gould or other well-known interpreter, they all impose a specific "tone", tempo, character to their recordings of this work. Nuff said. I rest my case. And yes the instrument she plays is gorgeous. Anyone who thinks a harpsichord is just a tinny tinkle box should think again.
