AIFF or FLAC?

~
Based on my limited understanding of things, I've chosen to rip my collection to AIFF. I'm Mac-based, and AIFF could easily be converted back to another format if required.

FLAC needs to be decoded/decompressed along the way, a potential source of issues. AIFF is an uncompressed format similar to WAV, but unlike WAV also has the benefit of supporting metadata and cover art.

Although I too have a PWDac, I've opted not to go with the Bridge and Elyric; I've heard about too many troubles with both, so I feed my PWD with a Mac Mini. I've been using iTunes for years, and didn't want to learn a new library.

With my system, I do sometimes hear a difference between WAV and AIFF on some recordings, but have decided that it's not enough of a difference to sacrifice metadata and the ease-of-use in iTunes/PureMusic.

I guess there is no easy answer at this point. A lot depends on your system, your own ears, and the amount of effort you're willing to put in, but if it helps at all.... I went with AIFF.

~

I believe the only caveat to using Pure Music in front of iTunes to play FLAC files is that once you load the FLACs into iTunes via Pure Music, you mustn't move the folder location.

It seems there are more benefits to using Pure Music in front of iTunes anyway, one of which is upsampling. As Catastrofe said, with the PM/iTunes combination, iTunes becomes just the library catalogue system, with no involvement in the actual playing of the file ; Pure Music handles that.

Again as Catastrofe says, if you'd prefer not to use Pure Music or Audirvana+ (and if you want metadata), stick with AIFF. Storage is cheap.