[mumblemumble]

The same is true of US English as well, and people will choose one or the other when they're trying to emphasize one perspective or the other.

In my neck of the woods at least, whether the proper noun itself is a plural word is also a major factor. I would be more likely to say, "The Beatles are a band," but, "Led Zepplein is a band."

Angels & Airwaves is a fun one, because it's two different proper nouns, but "Angels & Airwaves is a band" still sounds more correct to my (Chicago) ears. I cannot provide any plausible-sounding rationalization for this opinion, but I will fight to the death to defend it.

[entropicdrifter]

Yeah, agreed. It's about context. I tend to use plural form even though I'm from the States too. That said, "Angels & Airwaves is a band" sounds more correct simply because it delineates the two proper (plural) nouns as a single (collective) entity very clearly.

Just like you'd say "Wells Fargo is a bank" even though it's obviously a huge corporation that is made up of thousands of people.

In some contexts it still makes way more sense to use the plural conjugations, like if you were to say "Angels & Airwaves are playing a great show", because at that point you're talking about what they (the band members) are doing. Likewise you would say "Angels & Airwaves are putting out an album" or "are retiring" because you're talking about the actions of the band members, as opposed to the business entity (the band itself).

Sorry, I'm a musician as well as a coder, so I've thought about the syntax of this before.

[mumblemumble]

I suppose I like "Angels & Airwaves is a band" because the alternative feels ambiguous in a way that creates tension. With "Angels & Airwaves are a band", I'm left wondering if that was the intended sense, or if they made some editing error and what was really meant is, "Angels & Airwaves is a band," or, "Angels & Airwaves are bands."