I imagine we’d all agree that it’s important for a performer to become personally involved in the music, to feel they’ve absorbed it so that it becomes part of them. A more contentious issue is the extent to which this should override other, more objective aspects of interpretation. It’s clear Hélène Schmitt has thought long and hard about Bach’s solo violin music. She’s thoroughly at home with 18th-century performance conventions – distinguishing between the strong and weak notes in a phrase, for instance – and produces a beautifully expressive Baroque violin tone, cleanly articulating the most complex passages. Yet I find her highly personal approach, with substantial tempo changes, rhythmic distortions and exaggerated pauses between phrases, disturbing and counterproductive. In movements like the Prelude to the Third Partita or the finale of the Second Sonata, which have a moto perpetuo character, it’s surely important to keep any liberties within bounds. A certain degree of flexibility gives such pieces a proper sense of expressive range, of emphasis and relaxation, but it’s just as important to give an impression of continuous, regular movement. Similarly, the dance movements in the Partita need not be metronomic but a degree of metric consistency – in the Gigue, for instance – is surely essential. There are movements, such as BWV1003’s Andante and much of BWV1005, where Schmitt allows the music to speak in a natural way, and the result is beautiful. But for Baroque violin-playing that consistently and successfully balances the subjective and objective, I’d recommend you turn to Rachel Podger (Channel Classics, 12/99).