It is impossible to accurately rephrase any Act in plain English, because everything hinges on the exact words used and the context in which they were used. Any rephrasing is necessarily an interpretation, and that may not be the interpretion the courts use.

However, it is possible to give a general flavour of an Act, as long as it understood that that is all it is. So here is my stab at the music aspect of the Act. There are similar issues surrounding sports and plays.

So, broadly, almost every performance of live music where someone is entertained, anywhere apart from a few special places, will need a licence from November and generally there will be a fee. In some cases, such as church halls, it will need a licence even though no fee is payable. What constitutes an audience and entertainment is unknown at this point. For example, a session in which most of the time everyone plays, but occasionally one person plays solo is unclear: the silent 'players' might constitute an audience.

The licence can be permanently associated with a place (like a pub), or it can be a temporary licence for some occasion, such as a garden party. There are limits on how many temporary licences can be applied for and on the duration of the event being licenced.