Critic: It generally holds true of concert pianists that the more famous the musician, the greater the pleasure of his or her audience.
Conclusion
Audiences' greater pleasure at performances by more famous pianists is fair and gives no cause for cynicism about audiences' ability to distinguish good playing from bad.
Evidence
It generally holds that the more famous a concert pianist, the greater the pleasure of his or her audience.
Evaluate
There's a big language shift from the terms of the evidence to the terms of the conclusion.
The evidence is talking about how famous a pianist is and how must pleasure the audience feels.
The conclusion is talking about good the playing is.
We probably want an answer to patch up these missing links.
We could interpret this as Explain Curious Fact, where the author is trying to interpret why audiences get more pleasure from more famous musicians. In the author's mind, it's because the pianist is playing better.
But maybe the audience just loves seeing someone famous.
Goal
Look for an answer connecting "more famous, play better" or for an answer connecting "more pleasure, play better".
Or let's otherwise look for any answer that suggests that audiences can distinguish good playing from bad playing, or one that rules out the idea that the audience's pleasure comes from some other source besides the quality of playing (such as from the fame of the pianist).