The Greatest Recording Ever Made: Nominations for the Poll

[Baron Scarpia]

I think that's an excellent codification of what makes a great recording.

Also: Did the recording make people talk about 'around the water cooler'? Did it have a cultural impact? (I really don't like that word but is there a more fitting one? Are, were, will people still talk(ing) about it ten, twenty, thirty, fifty years after its making? Did it change the perception of a composer? Did it change the interpretative history? Or the reception of the same repertoire? (I.e. did it become the recording 'to measure all others against'?)

This is more-or-less the same as my comment, which you brushed off earlier.

Regarding my comments on Scarlati, I think if you are going to claim something is the greatest recording ever made, it has to be something monumental, that changed the business of making recordings and changed the way people listen to music. Probably it should be of a monumental piece of music, like Beethoven's 9th and something that many people have heard. Something like a Furtwangler wartime recording of the 9th, Van Cliburn's recording after winning the competition in Moscow, Dorati's 1812 Overture, Gould's Goldbergs. Exquisite though they may be, to suggest a series of recordings of harpsichord music that maybe sold 800 copies strikes me as crazy.

It is not performance, it is recording. After Toscanini recorded Beethoven millions of people who had never heard it before heard it, or heard it a new way. After Casals recorded Bach's suites, music which was utterly obscure became widely known. This should not be about who got the tempo just right in the andante. It should be about what classical recording had the biggest impact on the world. Aren't you tired of endlessly fussing about what recording got this or that little detail right?

The claim that Casal's recording of the Bach Suites as been superseded by 200 subsequent recordings makes no sense to me. Those 200 recordings, except for a few, are vanity projects, some hardly distinguishable from each other. Casals took obscure works that were consider bone dry academic exercises, only included in the Bach edition out of a duty to completeness, and breathed life into them. That is a great recording that changed music.

The difference between Pablo Casals and Pieter Wispelwey is that Casals was a genius and Wispelwey is a guy that plays the cello very nicely.

[Sammy]

The claim that Casal's recording of the Bach Suites as been superseded by 200 subsequent recordings makes no sense to me. Those 200 recordings, except for a few, are vanity projects, some hardly distinguishable from each other. Casals took obscure works that were consider bone dry academic exercises, only included in the Bach edition out of a duty to completeness, and breathed life into them. That is a great recording that changed music.

The difference between Pablo Casals and Pieter Wispelwey is that Casals was a genius and Wispelwey is a guy that plays the cello very nicely.

I'm not going to comment on Casals vs. Wispelwey, but I consider the premise that Casal's Bach Cello Suites has been supplanted by many other subsequent recordings to be ridiculous.

[Ken B]

I'm not going to comment on Casals vs. Wispelwey, but I consider the premise that Casal's Bach Cello Suites has been supplanted by many other subsequent recordings to be ridiculous.

Supplanted is the wrong word. Surpassed is le mot juste.

[André]

Surpassed is ok. As long as it took many attempts and many years to have it universally considered surpassed. Longevity is a key ingredient. Meteoric fame will not do.

Some interpreters were not just geniuses, they were also pioneers (Gould, Callas, Deller, Casals). Some of their recorded performances may have been surpassed, but they were the first there and held their place for a long time.

[Ken B]

Surpassed is ok. As long as it took many attempts and many years to have it universally considered surpassed. Longevity is a key ingredient. Meteoric fame will not do.

Some interpreters were not just geniuses, they were also pioneers (Gould, Callas, Deller, Casals). Some of their recorded performances may have been surpassed, but they were the first there and held their place for a long time.

Yes. I would call Gould's 1955 Goldbergs epochal. There are many now I think better, but it held a special place for a generation. Same with the Casals Bach. Deller was  almost the only one for a decade and his stuff is still great (although the voice is nowhere near the best more modern counters).

I would walk a mile to get away from a Callas recording, but I agree she was epochal too. (I just have no idea why.)

[Mirror Image]

Oh, you're doing fine with the Debussy-listening and championing Jacobs' as one of the great recordings of his music. You belong here more than you might think. In any case I hope you are not feeling unwelcome. Even those who don't like to buy into the "Greatest" thing (though we all kind of have our own idea of what it might be) may participate here.

Thanks, Jens. I suppose if I nominate anything, it'd be this recording and this is only because it had a tremendous effect on me before I started to seriously get into classical music:

[Mandryka]

Yes. I would call Gould's 1955 Goldbergs epochal. There are many now I think better, but it held a special place for a generation. Same with the Casals Bach. Deller was  almost the only one for a decade and his stuff is still great (although the voice is nowhere near the best more modern counters).

I would walk a mile to get away from a Callas recording, but I agree she was epochal too. (I just have no idea why.)

It sounds like you're saying that large volume sales is a factor - that (e.g.) That the Casals Bach is great because lots of people bought it and used to listen to it with pleasure. I don't know if you're saying large sales is a necassary or a sufficient condition or both or neither. Maybe marketing is an ingredient in all of this.

Is The Three Tenors on the list? I mean it sold a lot and introduced some people to the music - probably more so than anything Callas ever recorded. Liberace? And Swingle Singers stuff . . .

[mc ukrneal]

This is more-or-less the same as my comment, which you brushed off earlier.

The claim that Casal's recording of the Bach Suites as been superseded by 200 subsequent recordings makes no sense to me. Those 200 recordings, except for a few, are vanity projects, some hardly distinguishable from each other. Casals took obscure works that were consider bone dry academic exercises, only included in the Bach edition out of a duty to completeness, and breathed life into them. That is a great recording that changed music.

The difference between Pablo Casals and Pieter Wispelwey is that Casals was a genius and Wispelwey is a guy that plays the cello very nicely.

This simply advances your criteria over others. And as often happens in these sorts of things, the newer generation is not able to 'break into' the ranks of those who came before (at least, not easily). Modern artists will always be disadvantaged if we frame it the way you have. For me, greatest does not mean historically important or first ever recording. In fact, quite the opposite, we should divest the recording of its historical baggage. In any case, I'm sure others have their own views as well, and I'd be interested to hear them (I find this more interesting than choosing the recording itself!).

[SurprisedByBeauty]

List of possible candidates for inclusion in a poll about "Greatest Recording Ever Made"

Now sorted by composer so that we may perhaps start bracketing to whittle things down.


Bach


Bach, Matthew Passion, Klemperer, EMI _ I / -2

Bach Matthäus Passion, Leonhardt (Harmonia Mundi) _ I

Bach Matthäus Passion, Harnoncourt III (Harmonia Mundi) _ I

Bach Matthäus Passion, Mogens Wöldike (Vanguard/The Bach Guild)

Bach, Mass in B Minor, Gardiner, Archiv _ III

Bach, Christmas Oratorio, Karl Richter, Archiv

Bach, Orchestral Suites, Harnoncourt, Teldec

Bach Goldberg Variations, Xhu Xiao-Mei (Mirare)

Bach, Goldberg Variations, Leonhardt, 1978, DHM _ I

Bach Goldberg Variations, Glenn Gould, Columbia _ III

Bach, Concertos italiaens, Tharaud, Harmonia Mundi _ II

Bach, Sonatas & Partitas, Milstein, DG _ I

Bach, Cello Suites, Casals, EMI _ I

Bach, Cello Suites, Fournier, DG

Bach, Organ Works, Karl Richter, DG

Bach, Organ works, Kooiman (Coronata) _ I

Bach Die Kunst der Fuge [organ] Rogg (EMI) _ I

Bach Das wohltemperierte Clavier, Gilbert (DG/Archiv) _ I

Bach Brandenburg Concertos, Goebel (DG/Archiv) _ I



Beethoven


Beethoven, Violin Concerto, Kreisler/Blech EMI

Beethoven, Violin Concerto, Zehetmair, Brugen, Philips

Beethoven, Triple Concerto, Richter, Oistrakh, Slava, HvK, EMI

Beethoven Symphonies (alternatively: Eroica?), Karajan, 1963, DG _ I (BOX)

Beethoven Symphonies, Zinman, Tonhalle, Arte Nova _ -1

Beethoven Symphonies, Toscanini, RCA BOX _ -1

Beethoven Eroica Symphony, Furtwängler, WP 1943 (EMI)

Beethoven Eroica Symphony, Monteux, Concertgebouw Orchestra (Philips/Decca)

Beethoven Symphony No 3 'Eroica' E Kleiber/VPO _ I

Beethoven, Eroica Symphony, Gardienr, ORR, Archiv

Beethoven Pastoral symphony: Walter, Columbia Symphony (Sony)

Beethoven, Symphonies 5 & 7, Carlos Kleiber, DG _ IIII

Beethoven, LvB 7, NYP, Toscanini, RCA _ I

Beethoven, Symphony No.9, Furtwangler, Bayreuth, EMI

Beethoven, Symphony No.9, Fricsay, DG

Beethoven Missa Solemnis: Bernstein, Concertgebouw (DGG)

Beethoven Sonatas, Schnabel, EMI _ II BOX

Beethoven Piano Sonatas, Backhaus II, Decca _ I BOX

Beethoven, String Quartets, Busch Quartet, HMV/EMI/Warner



Brahms



Brahms Piano Concertos, Gilels/Jochum, DG _ II

Brahms Piano Concertos, Fleisher/Szell, Sony _ I

Brahms Symphony 4, Kleiber, DG _ I

Brahms Symphony no 2: Abbado, BP (1969) (DGG)

Brahms Symphony no 3: Walter, Columbia Symphony (Sony)

Brahms, PC 1, Rubinstein, Reiner, RCA


Bruckner


Bruckner 7, Vienna, Karajan, DG _ III

Bruckner: Eugen Jochum, Symphony #7 / Complete Bruckner Symphonies, DG _ I

Bruckner, Symphony no 5: Klemperer, New Philharmonia (EMI)

Bruckner,Symphony No.5, Celibidache, MPhil, EMI

Bruckner, Symphony no 6: Keilberth, BP (Teldec)

Bruckner, Symphony no 8: Böhm, WP (DGG)


Britten


Britten, Peter Grimes, Britten-Pears et al., Decca _ I

Britten, Peter Grimes, Davis, Vickers, Philips _ I

Britten, War Requiem, Britten, Decca. _ I


Mozart


Mozart, Figaro, E.Kleiber, Decca _ III

Mozart, Horn Concertos, Brian, EMI _ III

Mozart, Clarinet Concerto, Pay/Hogwood, Decca

Mozart Mass in C minor/Leppard _ I

Mozart, Symphonies, Hogwood (Decca/l'Oiseau Lyre) _ I BOX

Mozart Figaro, Solti (Decca) _ I

Mozart Così, Klemperer (EMI) _ I

Mozart Zauberflöte, Klemperer (EMI) _ I

Mozart, Requiem, Harnoncourt, DHM

Mozart, Requiem, Boehm, DG


Schubert


Schubert String Quintet, Prades (Casals/Tortelier)

Schubert, Death & Maiden, Amadeus Quartet, DG _ I

Schubert Complete Symphonies Immerseel (Columbia/Zig Zag) _ I BOX

Schubert, Schoene Muellerin, Fischer-Dieskau, Moore, EMI

Schubert, Winterreise, Fischer-Dieskau, Demus, DG _ II


Shostakovich & Prokofiev


Prokofiev Piano Sonata 8 et al, S.Richter, DG

DSCH, VC & CC, Oistrahk, Rostropovich, CBS _ I

DSCH, Sy.5, Bernstein (Tokyo), Sony

DSCH, Sy.8, Kondrashin, (?)

DSCH, Sy.15, Sanderling, Erato _ I

DSCH, Sy.15, Kondrashin, Dresden, Profil


Stravinsky


Stravinsky: Rite of the Spring, Lenny, Sony (1958)

Stravinsky: Rite of the Spring, Gergiev, Philips

Stravinsky: Rite of the Spring, Stravinsky, either of his own _ III

Stravinsky, Firebird, Boulez, DG _ II


Tchaikovsky & Rachmaninoff


Tchaikovsky, PC1, Horowitz/Toscanini, RCA

Tchaikovsky, Sys. 4-6, Mravinsky, DG _ IIIII

Tchaikovsky: Manfred Symphony, Toscanini, RCA _ I

Tchaikovsky/Rachmaninoff, PC 1 & 2, Argerich, Philips _ I

Tchaikovsky PC 1, Rachmaninoff PC 2; Cliburn, Kondrashin/Reiner _ I

Rachmaninov Vespers, Sweschnikow (EuroDisc) _ II

Rachmaninoff/Stokowski, 2nd PC, RCA

Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto 2, Richter, DG _ III

Rachmaninov: Piano Concerto, Byron Janis #3 RCA _ I


Verdi & Wagner


Verdi, Otello, Domingo et al., Maazel, EMI _ I

Verdi, Traviata, Gheorghiu, Solti, Decca

Verdi, Rigoletto (Giulini) _ I

Verdi, Falstaff, Toscanini, RCA _ I

Wagner, T&I, Furtwangler, EMI _ II

Wagner, Ring, Solti, Decca_ IIIII BOX


Other


Yonder Came A Courteous Knight, Ravenscroft, by the Pro Cantione Antiqua _ I

Victoria The Victoria Collection, Christophers (Coro)  _ I

North German organ music, Leonhardt (Sony/Vivarte) _ I

Buxtehude complete organ works, Harald Vogel (MDG) _ I

Vivaldi Four Seasons, Marrinner, Decca _ I

Scarlatti, Sonatas, Pletnev, Virgin _ I

The Scarlatti Sonatas, Scott Ross, Erato BOX - 2

Händel Water Music & Music For The Royal Fireworks, Gardiner (Philips) _ I

Hummel/Piano Concertos 2&3 Hough _ I

Mendelssohn/Schumann Piano Trios, Cortot/Thibaud/Casals, EMI

Liszt: Sonata in B minor, Krystian Zimerman, DG _ I

Chopin Vladimir Tropp plays Chopin [a.o. Sonata no. 2] (Denon) _ I (bit obscure?)

Chopin Waltzes, Lipatti, EMI _ I

Berlioz, Symphonie Fantastique, Colin Davis, LSO _ I

Berlioz, Les Troyens, Davis, Philips _ I

Berlioz, Les Troyens, Davis, LSO Live

Dvorak, Sys, 8 & 9, Kubelik, DG _ I

Offenbach: Entre Nous _ I

Puccini, Tosca, Callas, de Sabata, EMI _ II

Faure: Requiem, Pavane . Durufle: Requiem, Philip Ledger, EMI _ I

Elgar, Cello Concerto, J.d.Pre, LSO, Barbirolli, EMI _ III

Holst Military Suites for Band/Fennel _ I

Holst, Planets, Boult, EMI _ I

Ravel, Daphnis & Chloe, Monteux, Decca _ I

Ravel/Debussy, Quartetto Italiano, Philips _ II

Debussy - Pelleas et Melisande, Roger Desormiere, EMI _ I

Schoenberg: Pierre Boulez, Gurrelieder, Columbia _ I

Schoenberg: Kubelik, Gurrelieder, DG _ I

Berg, Lulu, Boulez, DG _ I

Janacek, Katia Kabanova, Mackerras, Decca _ I

Janacek, Makropoulos, Mackerras, Decca _ I

Strauss, Four Last Songs, Schwarzkopf (OTTO or Szell?), EMI _ III

Bartok Cto. for Orchestra, Reiner, RCA _ I

Bartok PCs, Anda, Fricsay, DG _ II

Messiaen, Turangalila, Wit, Naxos

Glass, 20 Piano Etudes, Batagov, Orange Mountain.  _ I

Philip Glass, Einstein on the Beach, CBS

L. Andriessen, De Staat (De Leeuw) _ I

Gorecki, Third Symphony, Upshaw/Zinam, Nonesuch _ I

Paert, Tabula Rasa, ECM _ IIII

Adams, Shaker Loops, Alsop, Naxos

Swing, Swing, Swing the 1938 broadcast _ I

The Three Tenors in Concert, Decca

[SurprisedByBeauty]

It sounds like you're saying that large volume sales is a factor - that (e.g.) That the Casals Bach is great because lots of people bought it and used to listen to it with pleasure. I don't know if you're saying large sales is a necassary or a sufficient condition or both or neither. Maybe marketing is an ingredient in all of this.

Is The Three Tenors on the list? I mean it sold a lot and introduced some people to the music - probably more so than anything Callas ever recorded. Liberace? And Swingle Singers stuff . . .

I think sales are indicative if not determinative. For starters, things sell for a reason. Also: If a lot of people heard it, the recording in question will have left a more considerable impression. It will have formed opinion, shaped the discussion, changed the perception. These may or may not be elements that go into one's idea of whatever "GREATEST" may mean. And what if a sensationally-sublime recording had been made, but no one ever heard it? Is that the reason why the non-Decca Keilberth Ring isn't in consideration, but Solti's is?

And yes, the Three Tenors are on the list.  (But you needen't vote for it. Determining what the best selling classical album was is a different matter and would be much easier. (Though still not easy, because then we'd get into the definition of what "classical" really means, in any narrow or specific sense.)

This simply advances your criteria over others. And as often happens in these sorts of things, the newer generation is not able to 'break into' the ranks of those who came before (at least, not easily). Modern artists will always be disadvantaged if we frame it the way you have. For me, greatest does not mean historically important or first ever recording. In fact, quite the opposite, we should divest the recording of its historical baggage. In any case, I'm sure others have their own views as well, and I'd be interested to hear them (I find this more interesting than choosing the recording itself!).

The journey is the goal. As a constant "there was no golden age" propagist, I agree that at the very least we ought to be aware of the historical 'baggage' and why it's there. But I also think that that baggage isn't worthless and doesn't come from nowhere. We're parsing through it here, I think.

[prémont]

The claim that Casal's recording of the Bach Suites as been superseded by 200 subsequent recordings makes no sense to me. Those 200 recordings, except for a few, are vanity projects, some hardly distinguishable from each other. Casals took obscure works that were consider bone dry academic exercises, only included in the Bach edition out of a duty to completeness, and breathed life into them. That is a great recording that changed music.

I did not claim that all 200 have surpassed Casals' recording, but if you have heard more than 100 of these (as I have) you will know, that many of them do. Of course I do not want to detract from its historical importance, and I agree that it has some attractive elements, but the fact that lots of people have been imprinted with it long time ago and for that reason consider it the golden standard should not prevent others from looking  upon it in an objective way and rate it against the competition in the way one rates every other recording of these works. If Casals' recording had been made to day (even in up to date sound) it would have drowned in the swirl of the competition.

[Marc]

If 'greatest' = 'most groundbreaking', then the Baron has a point.
If 'greatest' = 'best', then Il Premont is right.

The journey is the goal.

This is gonna be a traveling thread.

[San Antone]

Just a few house-cleaning suggestions ...

Maybe consider using Arabic numerals?  And single spacing the entries? What about alphabetizing the "other" selections?

0:)

If I am allowed another suggestion, then,

Debussy - Pelleas et Melisande, Roger Desormiere

[André]

The Keilberth Ring was not issued commercially until very late in the day, if I'm not mistaken. Therefore it never received wide distribution or mass marketing efforts. Only confirmed wagnerites are likely to look at it as a first or second choice. If there is a Ring thread, it will probably give the Solti a run for his money, but again, only confirmed wagnerians would have an opinion on the subject. Unless I'm wrong, this thread is more for general than specialized appraisal, non ?

@ Ken B: Callas made italian opera relevant again. Opera Lovers started paying attention to the (melo)drama taking place on stage. That was especially the case with bel canto repertoire, where her charisma drew the audience in like no other singer before her. Because of her, talented stage directors (Visconti, Zeffirelli) were attracted to the opera scene, and new singers (Caballé, Gencer, Sills) were able to develop their talent in the bel canto repertoire. It cannot be denied that a new era for italian opera opened in the 50s, and Callas was at its epicenter. Many listeners cannot go past the voice, which many find frankly unattractive - just like some piano lovers cannot go past Gould's humming or musical provocation (some of his Mozart or Beethoven sonatas for example).

Jens, you forgot a few entries: DSCH 5 (Lenny) and 8 (Kondrashin). Maybe some more, I didn't check everything. This is a wonderful thread for the insights we can share - as has been said, even mor fun than the actual list !

[Ken B]

The Keilberth Ring was not issued commercially until very late in the day, if I'm not mistaken. Therefore it never received wide distribution or mass marketing efforts. Only confirmed wagnerites are likely to look at it as a first or second choice. If there is a Ring thread, it will probably give the Solti a run for his money, but again, only confirmed wagnerians would have an opinion on the subject. Unless I'm wrong, this thread is more for general than specialized appraisal, non ?

@ Ken B: Callas made italian opera relevant again. Opera Lovers started paying attention to the (melo)drama taking place on stage. That was especially the case with bel canto repertoire, where her charisma drew the audience in like no other singer before her. Because of her, talented stage directors (Visconti, Zeffirelli) were attracted to the opera scene, and new singers (Caballé, Gencer, Sills) were able to develop their talent in the bel canto repertoire. It cannot be denied that a new era for italian opera opened in the 50s, and Callas was at its epicenter. Many listeners cannot go past the voice, which many find frankly unattractive - just like some piano lovers cannot go past Gould's humming or musical provocation (some of his Mozart or Beethoven sonatas for example).

Jens, you forgot a few entries: DSCH 5 (Lenny) and 8 (Kondrashin). Maybe some more, I didn't check everything. This is a wonderful thread for the insights we can share - as has been said, even mor fun than the actual list !

Yep, I cannot get past Callas's voice, especially the mile wide vibrato. I'd rather listen to a tape of Donald Trump rutting.

[Baron Scarpia]

I did not claim that all 200 have surpassed Casals' recording, but if you have heard more than 100 of these (as I have) you will know, that many of them do. Of course I do not want to detract from its historical importance, and I agree that it has some attractive elements, but the fact that lots of people have been imprinted with it long time ago and for that reason consider it the golden standard should not prevent others from looking  upon it in an objective way and rate it against the competition in the way one rates every other recording of these works. If Casals' recording had been made to day (even in up to date sound) it would have drowned in the swirl of the competition.

If Casal's recording had been made today there wouldn't be 200 competing versions. It wouldn't be the first because there would have to be one in the Teldec complete Bach and the another Hanssler complete Bach, so it would be the third recorded and the best. It would take at least another 5 years for the 200 versions to be produced.

[prémont]

If Casal's recording had been made today there wouldn't be 200 competing versions. It wouldn't be the first because there would have to be one in the Teldec complete Bach and the another Hanssler complete Bach, so it would be the third recorded and the best. It would take at least another 5 years for the 200 versions to be produced.

It seems to me, that you exaggerate Casals' importance. Well, he was the first, but during the first half of the 20th century musicians and musicologists were busy with a systematic revival of all Bach's works. Already in the early 1950es very comprehensive recordings of eg. his organ and harpsichord works were made, so also the cello suites were bound to become revived (even without Casals' efforts) maybe in the late 1940es or so. And several (>100) recordings would be made until now.

[Mandryka]

I first got to hear these suites through Casals, I remember thinking that the preludes were nice, and maybe some of the sarabandes, but the faster movements seemed as dull as ditchwater to me. It was only when I listened to other musicians that I strarted to see that these suites were really great music. I still have a soft spot for Casals in the prelude to BWV 1012, but much less so elsewhere.

I wouldn't underestimate the importance of the record companies' marketing here. The image of Casals playing on some improvised cello made with a gourd, or playing the Bach suites in toto in a café in Barcelona, his battle with arthritis, and of course his stand against Franco, these things all contribute to the mystique. These are the sort of things which make for good PR, which leads to the high sales volumes which some people think of an indicator, albeit a fallible one,  of a "great" recording.

[Ken B]

I first got to hear these suites through Casals, I remember thinking that the preludes were nice, and maybe some of the sarabandes, but the faster movements seemed as dull as ditchwater to me. It was only when I listened to other musicians that I strarted to see that these suites were really great music. I still have a soft spot for Casals in the prelude to BWV 1012, but much less so elsewhere.

I wouldn't underestimate the importance of the record companies' marketing here. The image of Casals playing on some improvised cello made with a gourd, or playing the Bach suites in toto in a café in Barcelona, his battle with arthritis, and of course his stand against Franco, these things all contribute to the mystique. These are the sort of things which make for good PR, which leads to the high sales volumes which some people think of an indicator, albeit a fallible one,  of a "great" recording.

Casals's recording was boring. Stravinsky nailed him for this I think. Anyway, count me in the anti-Casals faction.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Casals's recording was boring. Stravinsky nailed him for this I think. Anyway, count me in the anti-Casals faction.

I tend to agree that Casals' Suites are a candidate for GROAT, on account of its trailblazing nature and status and original quality... but that it doesn't probably make the cut because it hasn't held up well enough in quality. (Sound quality as well as improvements in performance since, that have relativized its status.) I think it's a candidate to take off this list. (But it doesn't deserve to be the first recording thrown off this list, either.)

It was my first recording of the Suites, as well, but it was very quickly superceded by Fournier. (Though not by Rostropovich or Ma, for whatever that's worth.)