Somebody, sooner or later, has to realize that the "package" mindset of music is going to go the way of the dinosaur.  There is little need for filling a CD or album any longer.  And, it will become more true as time goes on with the emergence of on-line music.  I'm probaby one of the very few who would suffer, since I only by CDs.  But, for Goldfrapp, I'd make an exception.  At this point it time, it might make the most sense to publish a song at a time, that the band is really satisfied with, until such time as they compile enough to put on a CD.  Then, publish a CD.  I'd also argue that screw Apple and all of the other middle-men.  Sell the songs direct from goldfrapp.com and keep all of the profits rather than sharing with someone that really no longer adds any value, except, maybe (and it's a stretch), convenience.

So, Bond movie and lots of individual, stellar songs as they become available.

Yep, that's why vinyl is making such a strong comeback. It is the ultimate collectors format, due to its size and physicality of product, and it is next to impossible to copy without some very impressive equipment. Yes, you can rip it if you have the right software and hardware, but that only gives you a digital copy, not the nice vinyl !
Appy's right with the double bubble concept. I recently bought Drones by Muse, their new album, and I got a double red vinyl, a CD copy and a DVD of, I guess as I have not played it yet, some videos and some live tracks. I also got an email which had a download link so I could get it digitally without ripping the CD.
As WW has suggested, I bought this via Muse.mu, their web site. This is the future while at the same time, being a step back into the past.
Apple have had their hand in our musical pockets for too long and were starting to take the piss over it. We need to find other sources to buy our music through. I like their products like IPod but you do not have to use them to get music onto it.
I was in a FNAC today ( a French Virgin Megastore type shop) and all of the Muse back catalogue was available on vinyl in that one shop. Standard pressings, special pressings and many others from a load of other artists.
Why do you think Led Zep and The Rolling Stones and every other big artist you can think of has been re releasing their back catalogue on special vinyl additions? Because they can sell you the product all over again, and you will buy it because it is different from what you already have and Apple are not in the mix, so they get a bigger rake on the take.
Bloody brilliant ! keep it up lads/lasses.

Absolutely can't stand the track by track idea (Heap Songs anyone?). I am a physical music collector: I crave design, multiple formats, bonuses, pages I can feel and turn, etc

Intersting point.  Will the physical products (i.e. CD and album) continue to exist just for people that like "stuff"?

I don't understand the comment by Appy, thought, that you never own a download.  You never own a streaming medium but you do own a download.

While, as I say, I don't use downloads, e-books, etc, I sure can see the advantage.  And, of course, what the people profiting from the exercise would like most is a regular monthly income from things like us purchasing monthly storage on the cloud, monthly bill for streaming video, streaming music, and anything else they can let you "rent", rather than buy.  That, I clearly hate.  Right up there with the idea of health insurance that assures one need work for the rest of their lives just so they can be "healthy".

Joey, are you talking about Imogen Heap?  Sorry, the reference went right over my head.  Personally, I love the idea of track by track, not so much for us but for the artist.  The idea that a band needs to put together a group of twelve or so songs to be able to sell them I think sucks for the creative process.  It's like telling an author that he can't sell his book until he's written twelve of them.  To me, it causes bands to put out less than their best work just to make it so they can get enough songs together to make a buck.  Bad for the band, therefore bad for me.  There are very few musicians, in my experience, that can meet the challenge of putting together twelve superb songs.

I still don't understand the thought that you don't own a download.  If you download the mp3 and you know enough to back it every which way but loose, it is yours ad infinitum.  And, that cannot be said to be true of CDs or albums if you play them enough times.

If you're saying you don't get all the cool stuff that you used to get, that is even true with CDs, sad to say.

♫Destroy your record collection/It's for your own protection♫

To me, Joey, "good in concept but very poor in execution" sounds like an early attempt at something new, which often is done poorly.  One of the drawbacks of being a visionary.  That doesn't mean the idea is bad, it's just mean someone is stumbling around in the dark a little. 

I think y'all's arguments for "the real thing" make sense and it kinda convinces me (thank goodness!) the real thing is going to be around for awhile.  I guess, in my case, I'm more interested in the continuation of physical books as opposed to e-books.  Though, really, in all cases of entertainment, they take up a lot of room when they are not e-versions.  Like I said, though, I'm way too old school, myself, to partake of the e-conversion.  I'm guessing that "Lifeline" happened just as I described.  She put out songs and, then, the album.  Kinda funny, in that my main point of putting out songs is that they are not rushed to get out just to fill an album.  I would have to say, though, that it really would have to be someone that cared not at all about the money, at this stage, that should attempt that approach.

LuDux said:

How one knows that it's done poorly, if it's "new" and thus without precendents?

That sounds like a quote. It also makes sense if you change it a bit to 'How does one know it is done properly, if it is 'new', and thus without precedent?'