Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it.
I would consider using them again, though I think I'd look at other options next time as well. The pricing was about what I was expecting - the total for rehearsal and the session (for the two performers plus an engineer) was $1000. I don't really have a framework to judge whether that's "normal", but it's about what I estimated it would probably be based on typical hourly wages for musicians and a guess at how long it would take. They played it together, which was a must for me - for this kind of music, the interplay between the performers is critical, and I didn't want the tempo locked in to a click track. So I was happy with that.
My main criticism is that I couldn't interact with the performers at all, and didn't get any feedback between the rehearsal and the session. I figured this was just standard practice in a work-for-hire situation like this, but have since heard that most people will set it up so that the composer can join remotely and give feedback or talk to the players. If I had been able to talk to them, I would've suggested taking the fast movements at a slightly slower tempo if it meant a technically cleaner performance, and I also would've asked for a few changes in their interpretation (e.g. there are places where they play things very staccato where I didn't want staccato).
I used to play flute, so I have a good idea of its technical abilities, but - even without speaking with the performers - I feel like I've learned a bit about the oboe. The other piece of feedback I'm sure they would have given me, because I can hear them struggling with it in the recording, is to allow better for breathing. This is something I obviously know about, as a former woodwind player, but I still often forget it when I'm writing. For the most part, I think they did a good job of finding places to breathe, but if I'd interacted with them, I feel like I could have added breath marks to the score in places that would least interrupt the flow of the music.