Steve Schwartz wrote:

>Starker is usually considered the standard (the first recording for EMI,
>rather than his later remake).  However, cellist friends of mine claim that
>Starker cheats by rewriting or omitting some of the *really* hard stuff.

I only know what I have been told, but, apparently, if Starker made cuts on
his first recording it was because the whole work would not fit on to four
78 rpms.  (Paris, 1948).  He restored the cuts he had made in the second
movement in his 1950 New York recording, but still avoided the 3rd movement
arpeggiation, declaring it was "too plaintive and stopped the action".  His
third recording - London 1956 - was still without the arpeggiation.  His
fourth and final recording - Tokyo 1970 - is the one I have on Delos (DE
1015), and it is complete.

I have also read that he did rewrite the alternating (high tessitura to
lower) G sharp octaves at the end of the third movement from G sh.  G sh.
G sh.  G sh.  to G nat.  G nat.  G sh.  G sh, because, he said, "it
increases the intensity".

Whatever, I find his interpretation so impressive that it leaves me  ...
speechless.

Maria Kliegel's interpretation on Naxos is quite adequate (how dare I say
that??), but Janos Starker ...  I prefer to quote Bernard Chasan: "the
work belongs to Janos Starker who brings out the barbaric atmosphere",
although he does so very much more than that.

I haven't heard Truls Mork. I'd like to.

Regards,

Christine Labroche