Who programs the Boston Symphony? There has been a small rumor that it is the same man who chooses the Boston weather. At any rate, both have strange and glorious ideas, but the majority of them are bad. the prevailing philosophy of Symphony programs seems to be: any recent work by a reputable living composer is worth performance, but, to make up for subjecting our customers--to such difficult music, let us play pap such a Rachmaninoff, Sibelius, Rimsky-Korsakov, and Tchaikovsky. And, to hide the fraud, when we play Mozard, let us botch the job.

In musical circles, the Boston Symphony owes its great reputation to precision playing and the persistent performance of new music. Koussevitzky's Beethoven has started numerous arguments; his Mozart is generally considered inferior to that of most reputable conductors. Russian music is his forte, and his Brahms is second only to Toscanini's.

But the vogue of Slavic music is definitely past; for Koussevitzky to make as much money out of Tchaikovsky as Freddy Martin is a form of disrespect for his audience. The celebration, with much pomp, of the eightieth birthday of a composer who stopped writing 20 years ago, and whose acceptability has been constantly sinking since, is not in the best of taste: let the poor man die.

Thus far, there has been one brilliant program: the contrast of the great intellectual classicist, Bach, and the great intellectual romantic, Berlioz. But, on another night, the audience was subjected to a double dose of Sibelfus, with a new Martina symphony thrown in; last Saturday the orchestra would up its program with Rachmaninoff and Rimsky-Korsakov, and broadcast it, too.

Lucky Bostonians who hold symphony tickets are entitled next week to hear Morton Gould and Tchaikovsky. Even Dr. Koussevitzky will not attend.