Mats Norman ambiguously recommended: >Horowitz/Toscanini Studio '41, or broadcast '43, or both? There are reasons to like or dislike these recordings as copious as reasons to like or dislike Horowitz; rather than bring up this debate I'll simply say that I personally like these recordings, although I would not recommend either as a 'first' recording, idiosyncratic, Horowitzian and 'spirit rather than letter' recordings that they are. (And with my delight for both deviation and detail, I'll point out that if you hear these recordings first, you might not notice that the arpeggio Horowitz adds at the climax of the cadenza in the third movement, which no doubt causes Jocelyn to cringe in horror, and which thrills me to no end, is not in the score.) I'd like to point out that to save quite a few pfennig, you can hear the Shostakovich 2nd (with Ortiz) recently mentioned here, and a more sober Tchaikovsky 1st, with Gutierrez (also recently mentioned) on Seraphim, CES 5-68536-2, and this is a good 'first' recording (also coupled with Spivakov/Ozawa on the violin concerto). I'll second the Van Cliburn and Argerich recordings as good interpretations (shhh...don't tell anyone though), and leave it to other capable list members which of these recordings are those artists' best. My personal favorite is ever Cherkassky/Ludwig which is on Cherkassky's second pair of discs in the Philips Great Pianists series, coupled with the unjustly neglected 2nd, and Cherkassky's glorious Kreisleriana and Symphonic Etudes. I'd like to apologize again for my scattered and unrefined prose, and in advance for all future posts.:) Regards, Michael Cooper ([log in to unmask])