There it was in the Carnegie Hall program! The explanatory stuffy footnote stated much of what ails "serious" music in the twenty-first century, "Please hold your applause until all the movements have been completed." The implicit criticism is obvious: the uninitiated concert-goer and people without the attention spans to identify and appreciate long abstract theme and key relationships—or at least count movements—are not welcome in this "hallowed hall".

I find this unreasonable and needlessly exclusive. During another recent concert even I—a  composer of serious music—lost track of which movement the ensemble was playing and I had to wait for the performers to stand up and bow before I applauded. I submit that a less seasoned concert-goer would be intimidated by having lost track, especially if they happened to applaud at the end of some movement that wasn't the last one. These audience members might not be as likely to attend future concerts for fear of doing something "wrong" in an action as simple and spontaneous as applauding.

Another piece on the same program included narration before each of the short movements and even though the applause was held until the end of the piece in the traditional manner, the narration provided a way for the audience to interact with the music all the way through. The difference in response to the two pieces was significant: where there were 40 minutes of music with six long and difficult-to-differentiate movements before applause was indicated, the audience was hesitant to react, even when the piece WAS complete, for fear of applauding in the "wrong" place. In the narrated piece, however,  INTERRACTION at least, if not applause, was EXPECTED all the way through, and the applause was immediate and enthusiastic when the [obvious] last movement ended.

The question is: Are esoteric and obscure macro-harmonies and key and theme relationships important enough to forego the frequent audience interaction that shorter periods between applause would provide? How many of the audience would be able to recognize these musical interrelationships—even on a subliminal level? How many of the MUSICIANS in the audience will identify them? Are the macro interrelationships more important than enjoying the music NOW? How often have you been distracted from LISTENING in order to figure out which movement the players are on so you're not guilty of premature applause?

There are plenty of note-perfect recordings of complete symphonies, sonatas, concerti and other multi-movement-musical-marathons. I suggest that the complex interrelationships among all the movements should be studied from these recordings by anyone who is interested. Live concerts should be a venue for INTERACTION between the performers and the audience; this would be much easier if the audience doesn't have to keep track of which movement is being played and can just applaud when each single piece is done—while they still can remember what the movement sounded like.

Programming single movements of musical works or encouraging applause at the end of movements might be a way for serious music to become more audience-friendy. I believe that the more opportunities an audience has to CONNECT with serious music, the more chances there are for the music to survive.

About the applause between movements? What a complement to Alan Fey and his performance! I was delighted.