Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky

I can't help you, but I've had this blog post bookmarked for several months, in readiness for my grand plan to read lots of Russian literature this summer. The author seems to have informed opinions on the matter. E.g. on Master and Margarita:

Picking the right translation is always a big deal, but it's unusually important with this book - there are several versions in print, and most are either too sloppy or done from a censored 1967 version of the text. The Bergin/O'Connor version is what you want, it's unabridged, meticulous and has invaluable endnotes. And what is sexier than invaluable endnotes?

(I also recommend 'Attacked by Thugs', an amusing Warsaw anecdote from the same blog.)

Hmm... I'll have to check read through the blog post, but personally I would say my experience reading the Pevear/Volokhonsky translation of Master was like reading a completely new book, and I mean it in a good way. So a v. strong recommendation from me on that front.

No comment on other books. For some reason I feel as if I've seen some criticism of their translation of at least one author.

Their approach to Feodor is interesting 'cause they decided to present him as he supposedly is in Russian as opposed to cleaning him up. Apparently, his style was full of willful provincialisms, non-sequiturs, and malapropisms, which apparently irked Nabokov to no end. Whether they'll have anything important to add to new translations of other Russians, I don't know.

the dialogue in their translations of dostoevsky is much more natural than in older translations (though i wonder if it reads less naturally in russian - would a nineteenth century translation really be the purest because he wrote it with nineteenth century conventions)? also, i like that they just transliterate the russian names instead of making "katerina ivanova" into "katherine ivanov" or something, that's really annoying. their notes from underground translation is also great.

i haven't read their master & margarita translation. i am curious as to how it compares to the bergin/o'connor, since it is SUCH a weird book that i bet translation makes a huge difference.

IMHO you can't go wrong with these two. First of all, they are thorough in their academics. I find that they have made all of corrections to the previously standard translations (ie Constance Garnett et al) that Nabakov points out in his Cornell lectures. Secondly, they seem to have a good grasp of the Russian poetics and are widely considered the most successful at conveying the authors' prose styles into English. Finally, they tend to be the most recent translations available so they generally have the benefit of a contemporary sensibility and language in their work as well as another century of literary thinking behind them (a very rich century at that; most editions being sold today have 80-90 year old translations).
Like Mitya, I can say that I enjoyed and understood more in rereading Karamozov and Dead Souls translated by P&V than my first readings of the Modern Library/Everyman editions.

some discussion here

Thanks for the link. It was the P/V Gogol translation that I saw bashed. But I still think you'd be silly to read anyone else's translation nowadays if you had a choice.