On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 06:15:40 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Scott Gardner" wrote in message


I was reading the recent Stereophile review of Apple's iPod,
and the reviewer had very good things to say about the samples that he
encoded using the AIFF format.

I opened up iTunes (nice to have it available for Windows now)
and ripped a few songs using AIFF to hear for myself.

I agree that iTunes is a very nice piece of software, and seems to sound
very good in a variety of usage modes.

They sounded
great, but when I checked the file sizes, they were huge. In fact,
they appeared to be uncompressed. No wonder they sounded so good! (It
would probably explain why I was importing at 55X speed, as well.)

So is AIFF just another uncompressed format, or is there some
sonic difference between AIFF and WAV files?

As typically used, both AIFF and WAV are just uncompressed format, with the
sound quality advantages and file size disadvantages that comes with them.
It is well-known that the "WAV" file format can act as a "wrapper" for
compressed files, so the statement that all "WAV" files are uncompressed is
not true. Not being a Mac person, I don't know if the same is true for AIFF.


Thanks for the reply. So if I import the same song from CD twice,
once as an AIFF file and once as a WAV file, there really shouldn't be
any sonic difference between the two, assuming I use 16/44.1/stereo
settings both times?

Scott Gardner