Music is a continuum and the modern and avant-garde composers of today will be part of the standard repertoire 30 years from now.
We don't want other people poking into our artistic pie.
Taste is changing, style is changing, and players' abilities are changing.
So I've never found there was any particular separation between the two cultures at all, musically speaking.
I think we were all frustrated with our daily routine.
As you know, there are certain languages that lend themselves very easily to vocal use.
Before, we may have taken part in it without even thinking it was American Jewish, but in this case, I think, you have now perhaps pointed us in a direction of a new interest in this repertoire.
But the most important test is to take them on tour and see if you can bear to spend time with them.
I think the quality of something like the Beveridge, for instance, will have a life of its own.
I would like new people with new ideas to come into it and change it.
If the (British) Arts Council give you money, they also tell you how to spend it.
If we perform the romantic repertoire we need more musicians.
Initially we performed in halls with capacities of 1,000.
Most Beethoven symphonies require 80 or more instruments, and the late romantics even more.
Mozart has written opera, symphony, sacred and chamber music - not to mention his piano and violin concerti.
One of the great virtues, apart from the pleasure of performing these works, is that it's opened up an entirely new, expansive repertoire of American Jewish music.
One thing we were looking for from the start was players who really fit together, who sounded in tune.
So I think we got together as the Academy to give ourselves that sort of responsibility and to play well.
So in one leap we had gone from being a friendly society to something almost professional.
The awful thing about a conductor becoming geriatric is that you seem to become more desirable, not less.
