They were, back in the autumn and for several months afterwards (having failed to appoint from the first batch of interviewees). I was told a couple of months ago that Andrew Burn, previously of the LSO (Education Officer I think) had been appointed, though I haven't heard much more about it since. I don't know much about him and am not at all passing comment on his abilities in making the following comment, but he's apparently going to combine the roles of Artistic Director and Managing Director (previously held by Gillian Moore and Cathy Graham respectively), which in the context of the current discussion does look troublingly like another instance where the Sinfonietta could have broadened its reach rather than centralising all policy-making in the hands of one individual.

Well, only you and Richard are here under your real names so maybe you were included!

Mwahaha! (To all of that) 

No, but seriously. To be factored into all the foregoing is the fact (at least I think it is one) that spnm, nmc, bmic etc. are to be merged, to all intents and purposes. The point here is that this move stems directly from the Arts Council's decision to 'rationalise' the new music sector, in view of the fact that its overall music budget is being slashed by HMG. I'm a bit out of the loop now, but that's how it looked a few months ago.

So, LS survives, the above orgs are 'merged' (not necessarily a bad thing, but we'll see), CMN survives as the only obvious performance-related org under the new dispensation, and we are looking at a probable shift in focus that could well see the hegemony of LS diminish. It'd still be a very, very small world; but within it focuses could shift. Last time I looked, 'the new organisation' (TNO - the working title for the merged institution) would be the 13th largest AC-funded music body in the country. And that's fairly hefty when you consider we're including the opera companies etc. in that equation.

The real downside though, is that smaller ensembles specialising in new music are more likely to encounter rejection of funding applications in the future; although there is plenty of scope for them to benefit from the clout TNO is likely to have.

Just to add: if we are going to talk about the workings of the music infrastructure in general, should we not have a different thread for that? This was, after all, started as a thread on Knussen (and the claims for him being the greatest composer of all time).

OK, that's very good to hear. Do you have any links you could post here regarding the cuts to the Arts Council music budget, by the way?

Changes do happen, of course, but they are not inevitable. They are, however, if no-one ever makes an issue out of them. Many of those working in the public sector would prefer no questions asked about their actions, decisions, etc. - that's not a luxury anyone should be granted if their work is funded by the taxpayer. I've been having some interesting conversations with some people here in Germany about parallel issues today - certainly such questions as whether new music is a self-serving enterprise for an unchallenged elite is becoming much more of an issue here as well. Somewhere like here is a highly public forum, with numerous people involved in one sense or other in the music world posting (and many others reading). I don't believe it's simply 'grumbling' (or bitching) to discuss major issues that affect such a world in such a forum. One of the ways some of those in power consolidate their position is through simply branding any dissenting voices as 'sour grapes'. Those who benefit from certain systems often seem loath to entertain any legitimate criticisms of it (and some can be seen to suddenly have about-turns when that system works for them).

One viewer of this forum and occasional poster texted me earlier, pointing out that he had only once ever seen a critical review of Knussen. Considering that music of Boulez, Stockhausen, Nono and many other such figures often receive much more mixed reviews, is Knussen thus on a different plane to the rest of them? I'd be surprised if anyone would realistically make that claim (though it seems to have been made on Music Matters). I'm also well aware of the often major discrepancies between what some critics say in private and what they write about certain figures when they know it's 'not done' to say anything critical of them if they still want to be invited to the right parties, reception, etc. Maybe this is just 'gossip', because it's based on information that is not written down? I prefer to call it oral rather than written discourse. A lot of things affecting musical infrastructures are deliberately not written down - that doesn't make them less important as a result.

Please excuse me for this omission, James - it's true that I only knew of your activities as ensemble director, having been abroad for so long, and, in the past year, having spent far too much time on my ridiculous commuting schedule to take much notice of the outside world. After June 19 I shall have no further excuses.

James, apparently you only need to know one: