I've been reading all of these comments of Rite of Spring and having a lot of fun doing it. There are so many issues with RIte that no one has even addressed. Such as: which version are you talking about? Stravinsky was tinkering with the score almost until he died. Some of it for copyright protection, some for cleaner sound, some to make the once-difficult rhythms easier to read. The early Bernstein is still my favorite for the electricity, but it's not the final edition of the score sanctioned by Stravinsky. I also know how Stravinsky wanted the opening bassoon solo played - I studied with the guy who played it on the Stravinsky recording. He should know, and be assured that many of the recordings out there do not do what the composer wrote or asked for. But does that mean it's no good? Not at all. All music is subject to interpretation once it leaves the composer's hand and performance standards change. If everyone did it the exact same way, why bother redoing it at all? I love the Rite no matter who's doing it - frankly, there isn't a bad recording out there. Some are more energetic, some more softened. Some (Boulez) get razor sharp precision, some (Stravinsky, Mehta) less so, but at no loss of thrills. All the hair-splitting about which is the best is pointless I suppose. But there's one issue that matters a lot more to me: how does it SOUND? How big of a sonic impact does it make? Do I feel the bass drum? For that, I go to Maazel on Telarc. Temirkanov on RCA. Turn the volume way up, sit back and be blown away! Shallow? Perhaps, but that's what brought me to this site in the first place: I want great sound.