Gould is a great pianist, but this set misrepresents his work and shows just how dull record-label executives can be when they put their minds to it.
First, why is there only one Gould set, but three for such pianists as Horowitz and Brendel? He was at least as good; obviously Sony didn't want to deal. If so, why include Gould at all. Why wasn't Philips honest enough to write that Sony is (likely rightly) trying to keep Gould's Bach to itself?
Second, Sony could have come up with a cleverer compromise, or Philips could have suggested one. For example, Gould in concert almost always played Bach's three-part inventions without the two-part ones. The Sony disk has them both, but they could have parted with the three-parters to give the buyer a taste of Gould's Bach. Why not one or two of the Partitas, number five and six perhaps? (They were originally released together.) Or some excepts from the W.T.C.?
Third, the very fact that Philips has to compromise should have given them a chance to give us a set of brilliant lesser-known recordings. The Bizet and Haydn are by far the best examples on this set. But Gould's English Baroque recordings are very tedious. He, himself, said that the pieces sounded better in his mind than on record. Philips had a chance to introduce the buyer to Gould's Beethoven sonatas Op. 27, both of which are great. And why not include his delightful transcription of Wagner's 'Meistersinger'?
They had a chance to be clever and they chose to be dishonest and tedious, but they cheated the buyer. So don't buy this set. Buy his Goldbergs &c. on Sony.