“Of course, technically he is practically flawless. Undoubtedly, his interpretation is original, personal and individual. Still, this sun does not give warmth, it blinds. Busoni's performance lacks spontaneity, enthusiasm, pathos, as well as expressivity, gentleness, or grace. Listening to him, one always feels acutely interested in his interpretation, but almost never—impassioned or captivated.”

The same opinions are heard in a number of other reviews: “The most power in his performance belongs to thought, not to the heart…. But what we want from music is what is felt, not what is thought…. And here, Busoni satisfies less”; “The root of Busoni's charm is willpower and intelligence, intelligence which is always at work, weaving complexities, whereas what you demand from art is above all spontaneity, reflective poetry”; “He has neither lyricism, nor drama. He does not move or inspire passion…. Busoni delights with the estheticism of his delivery, but does not captivate with its expressivity.”

These quotes explain some of the reasons why the greater number among the public and critics expressed so much unhappiness with Busoni's interpretation of Chopin, and generally preferred that of Hofmann. “The cerebral, or ‘brain’ category plays a much greater role in the art of Busoni than of Hofmann, whose ‘feeling’ category, the heart, is primary….” “As opposed to Busoni, Hofmann is, above all else, a poet…. ‘Prayer’ is the word that best describes the playing of Hofmann…. This flame does not rage with eruptions of furious elements…. It glimmers quietly, like an inextinguishable light.”