Minor points, but... Ckorody--you said EAC and I think you prolly meant something else; EAC is a CD ripper that can be configured to produce nearly any format audio, whether ALAC, AAC, WAV, MP3, FLAC, etc. Sfar, but Apple Lossless *is* a compression scheme, its just that its a lossless (v. lossy compression scheme).
AIFF and WAV are simply file packages for raw PCM data. They are uncompressed and functionally identical.
WMA Lossless, Apple Lossless, and FLAC are examples of compression schemes that make file size smaller, but in a way that is reversible with no information loss. Typically, it means less compression savings, but no lost data. (Like "zipping" a computer file).
MP3 and AAC are lossy compression schemes. They sacrifice data for greater compression. They typically use psychoacoustic algorithms to decide what can be lost from the file with minimal impact on acoustics. Since MP3 and AAC are lossy schemes, they typically have parameters that can be varied (e.g., bit rate) that implicate more or less compression and, conversely, less or more data loss and audible impact. So, two mp3s of the same song may not sound alike--a VBR mp3 is a lot better sounding than a 128kpbs CBR mp3 in most cases.
So, makes no difference if you use AIFF or WAV. Next best (I would argue identical) would be ALAC, FLAC, or WMA Lossless. Next best is variable bit rate MP3, or high bitrate AAC. For a given bitrate, I also recall the pundits preferring AAC over MP3.
Using a decent playback system--i.e., good outboard USB audio device--any lossless format will compare favorably with very high quality CD transports.
