Despite i think Gould was one of greatest Bach's interpreters(with the exception of WTC),i always found "extravagance" in works like Appassionatta,or the Bhrams Piano concerto in Dminor.Sometimes his "extremes" even if he pretend to put in evidence things wich many pianists take few care of them, Thanks Gould for the good intention, but unfortunately the results "sound" just horrible. Anyway the great "Gould" brain tried to do this kind of things with works who deserved and wich allow to do it for it inner estructure,conception,etc.Here is maybe the reason wich justified plenty the Gould's aproach,despite the ears pain. Speaking about Lupu's playing of the works which are mentioned in Allan's Mail,i really didn't heard that CD,but i will try to find it.The few times i listen to Radu Lupu,in live performance,i really enjoy a lot his conceptions of (especially) slow "tempi". I remembered the Introduction of the Beethoven's Choral Fantasy.It was Very slow,but at the same time "very" wonderful, what a control of dynamics,phrasing,etc..and specially the "atmosphere" he created. I always think(specially in this times of "play fast or die") the supreme art comes when you can control succesfully "slow " movement playing it "slow". On the other hand is the "school" who justifye play Adagio like Allegretto,with the excuse of making that music, "lighter".Well i don't believe in that. Another extreme are at example the Tchaikowsky Piano oncerto No1 in Arrau's version,but here is a different story,because (under my point of view)Arrau's pedantic conception of a work (even being a wonderful work),who is beautiful, but wich intellectualy in the inner musical aspect,has not any important thing to put out,sounds just distorsioned playing in that way. Regards. Gerardo Constantini:.