Hi, and, yep, I purchased Farr's D'anglebert a few months ago on the strength of her superb 3-cd Byrd set (also on Naxos) and the exceptional price. I tried very much to like it but did not really succeed, and gave the set to a friend. She plays much too slow and, at least for me, the momentum is lost. Worse still, the lute harpsichord does not really suit D'anglebert's profusely ornamented music, making the pieces sound almost annoying (an example of a good lute harpsichord recording is Robert Hill's Bach transcriptions double CD). The minor suites played on harpsichord are better, but nowhere near the superb standard set by Rousset in his recording. Maybe that's why I didn't fancy Farr, because of comparison with Rousset.
Don't get me wrong, it's still a good and extremely value-for-money set, and the Fanfare review has great things to say about it. And quite a few reviews have criticised Rousset's D'anglebert as being too fast, clinical and relentless. I guess it's just a matter of taste and preference. On my part, I find Rousset, who always gives great importance to the tempo of the music while respecting the composer's intentions (sometimes too much), the more convincing interpreter. And he plays a glorious Rucker's original.
There are other recordings: Celine Frisch, I feel also fails to convince but it gets a superb recommendation from ClassicsToday; a 1990 recording by Arthur Haas which is greatly admired; Hank Knox, from the jpc samples I've heard, also seems very idiomatic.
And Farr's Byrd set is a definite must-have. Her use of the lute harpsichord in this recording, which suits these pieces very well, is exemplary and fully convincing.