Palestrina, why not

While the precise date of birth is slightly conjectural, we are approaching Palestrina's 500th anniversary. Anniversaries are always an easy pretext for rediscoveries and revaluations, so this is where I am for now.
1) At his best Palestrina's music is soothing and euphonious with a slight tendency toward melancholy and nostalgia. The 1564 second book of motets a 4 includes gems like Super Flumina or Sicut Cervus, arguably the best intro to his art (full disclosure, I discovered these pieces by singing them a long time ago in a boy choir and I may not be impartial). A serviceable recording is Berrini 1995, but let's see if new stuff is released this year.
2) At his worst Palestrina is dull, repetitive and tedious. The late offertories of 1593 are a good example of this tendency, although Taruskin writes interesting things about them in the Oxford History. To be reconsidered.
3) The Missa Papae Marcelli published in 1567 remains his best known piece, which is understandable. I like it most when sung by relatively large choral forces, such as Preston 1985 on Archiv. I am less enthusiastic about  the madrigal-style reading(s) by the Tallis Scholars or more recently (2020) the all-male live recording by Beauty Farm, a group that truly excels in earlier polyphonic repertoires.
4) And finally, Palestrina is of course the main character of Pfitzner's opera. It is arguably one of the rare cases of an opera with a better libretto than music (Nixon in China comes to mind as well...), but I find the third act strangely moving and the second act (with all the cardinals deeply engaged in intrigue and conspiracy) remarkably true to life. For a recording go for the good old 1973 Kubelik.