Agree concerning most of the later Gulda, say on Amadeo. Early Gulda can be interesting, however. Such as the Orfeo and the various Membran/Milestones etc. releases.
(( Btw, surprisingly, I found his early Chopin Concerto 1/Boult to be my favourite recording; his early Debussy is good too )).
Based on all of this I've done some listening, comparing all three of the Gulda cycles and they are quite different. I used a selection of sonatas for my comparison including Op2/2, Op13, Op27/1, Op31/2, Op 53 and Op 109.
It's in the early sonatas where the differences between the sets is minimal and it's enjoyable playing. However, as Gulda moves further through the oeuvre you hear a discernible difference in approach between the Amadeo set and it's younger siblings. The word that comes to mind when describing the Amadeo is impatient. You feel as if Gulda is thinking "OK, let's get this finished so we can move on." and it leaves me with a feeling of impatience as well. Many of the movements are played at a very fast clip and don't seem to have much thought put into them. They just move inexorably and inevitably forward leaving the listener with little breathing space.
Now I am not against speed in the LvB outer movements. Two of my all time favourite sonata recordings are Rudolf Serkin's 1952 Waldstein and Gilel's 1960 Moscow Appassionata which both have some very fast playing. I also like Tomsic in the Waldstein. They make the music work, they make it thrilling. Gulda just makes it fast.
Listening to the Philips and the Orfeo recordings I find Gulda much more in touch with what I consider to be Beethoven's intentions. Of the two, I easily prefer the Orfeo. It's a young man's Beethoven and hasn't been overthought. Gulda simply plays the sonatas as laid out and it works. The sound is better too.
