I just read about a "new" recording named above that supposedly is a recorded compendium of every piece of music J.S. Bach ever composed. The publisher, DG, is said to have prepared 8,000 sets of 333 CDs each. Can you imagine?
Of course I do not know, how you prefer these partitas played, but maybe the problem is the piano.For example, I have never found a complete set of J.S. Bach six keyboard partitas on the piano that I ever thought good enough to keep, so I quit trying. I own all six but not by the same performer.
He plays it the way Alfred Cortot might have played Chopin on a harpsichord. Can't say his experiment does much for me.RĂĽbsam turns each Goldberg variation into an instrumental madrigal, no one has tried that before as far as I know, not even Richard Egarr or Sergio Vartolo have such independent voices.
My biggest reservation about the performance isn't the rubato, nor the tempo (no need to listen to the whole thing at once.) It's that he didn't chose a tuning which would have made for more crunchy chords. After all, if we're going to have madrigals, let's have Neapolitan ones!
I think it's unfair to describe Glenn Gould as inexpressive and motoric. Maybe I'm crazy, but I think Gould's 1955 Goldberg Variations is intensely expressive. Of course, it's all there in the music itself. You can play it straight and skip the repeats and the deep power and feeling of the music still comes across. Of course, you're probably right that this is definitely not what the composer intended, but I don't think RĂĽbsam's approach is any closer!Rubsam's presumption isn't so much that his way is the only right way, though he may think something like that, it's that we know enough about attitudes to articulation, tempo etc to be sure that the inexpressive motoric way is just not what the composer meant.