I think that we can find a mutually agreed position in a few simple statements:

The Act is better than the original Bill.
The only thing lost compared with the position before the Bill is "two in a bar", which was always an ambiguous exemption and at its strictest interpretation a pretty small sop.
Subject to any cases of two in a bar that are made worse, the Act is significantly better than the previous situation.
The Act could have given even more to music, but any legislation has to achieve a balance between different interests. In this instance because neighbours of pubs etc. have aspirations as well as musicians.
The Act is the best we have and the best we have ever had even if in the longer term we aspire to even better.
Even with the Act there are opportunities for some local authorities to be musch more supportive of music than others.
We need to use influence to ensure that Local Authorities employ the most music friendly interpretation within the flexibilites in the Act.

Richard