From contemporaneous reviews
“Salzburg was more satisfactory than ever before, not so much because of the inclusion of epoch-making masterpieces, as because of the more vigorous exclusion of works having no claim or title to be performed there.
“It is in fact to be expected that, as the International Society advances in years, the outstanding works performed annually will tend to become fewer.
“If the element of enjoyment in the best sense is to be eliminated from art, one must be very very sure of what is being put in its place, and for the present I confess that, with all the respect due to intellectual prowess, I remain sceptical.”
— Edwin Evans, “After the festivals,”
Modern Music, Vol. I, No. 3 (November 1924), pp. 23.
“While naturally not every work performed at Salzburg and Prague deserves international recognition, it is still worth the effort to draw whatever evidences exist of musical vitality and new individualities, outside the boundaries of their origin.
“As a whole, however, there were not many works of outstanding interest. Many of the compositions took on that drab, dejected hue so noticeable in the post-war music of Europe. But, as in all art, the few grains are worth the chaff. At no period were only masterpieces produced, and those great works that have come down to us have long since been culled from a host of mediocrities.”
Richard Hammond, “Salzburg,”
Modern Music, Vol. I, No. 3 (November 1924), pp. 24, 25.