I'm amazed by the attitude of some of the people on here, who are presumably musicians themeselves. They will have paid, perhaps quite a lot of money, for their instruments, and they'll pay for new strings, bow rosin, tuning or whatever it is their instrument needs to keep it in fettle. They'll pay for music books and CDs, and no doubt when they go out playing music they'll pay for a drink or two. But they object to the very idea that a small payment might be made for the actual music they play. AND IT'S NOT EVEN THEM WHO HAS TO PAY IT!

I'll say it again: the problem is, firstly that the sometimes heavy-handed approach by the PRS can jeopardise the very existence of venues, where these are not being run on a commercial basis, and secondly that the sampling method used by PRS makes it unlikely that the composers whose music is actually being played will see any royalties.