Just having lauded the greatness of Liszt in transforming the greatest of music into redefining piano works, and the greatness of Katsaris's relisation of the same, it is interesting to revisit Scherbakov's accomplished, more taut, but far less imposing and memorable cycle. Although the golden era of romantic pianism is not absent, it is mostly kept safely in the background, regrettably giving way to the post-period-performance ideal that has largely ruled the Beethoven Symphonies cycles of the past decade.
Hence, it comes as no surprise that Scherbakov is most successful in the 'lighter' symphonies--especially the Second and, again, as with Katsaris, the Fourth that may be Liszt's single most idiomatic orchestral transcription. However, in the revolutionary romantic odd-numbered symphonies, Scherbakov's results are typically light, clipped and emotionally underwhelming in the HIP manner.
All the same, Scherbakov's technical achievement is very impressive, not far behind that of Katsaris, whereas Naxos's sonics are clearly preferable to Teldec's. Since Liszt's inimitable transcriptions deserve a significantly greater audience, Scherbakov does offer a viable--and indeed chronistically 'correct', as it were--alternative to Katsaris's romantically opulent reference cycle. In several aspects, it is fair to say that Scherbakov's piano cycle largely resembles Vänskä's orchestral ditto.