 This account would square with a report in "The New York Times" (29 November 1928) which suggested that the jury were divided on four scores which were considered outstanding but eventually rejected as ‘in a modernistic vein inappropriate to the occasion’, and that Atterberg's Symphony was awarded the prize as the best of the others, with (it seems) five jurors dissenting and the deadlock broken by the casting vote of Glazunov.Yet Atterberg's Symphony No.6 - though hardly the equal of Marek's, or indeed Schmidt's or Brian's works as a feat of symphonic thinking - is by no means the mere pastiche that it was represented as in contemporary reviews; and one might have expected that its rather prominent vein of polytonality would have rendered it equally ‘inappropriate to the occasion’.