Lossless is lossless as far as the digital file goes. I don't know why one would be superior to another sonically since they will both be converted to the same analog format.
OSX CD ripping codec
I have about 3000ish CDs. When I started ripping them via iTunes, I went the AIFF/44k route.
Sometime later, I wandered into a well known home theatre boutique in Los Angeles and the rep scoffed at my AIFF choice, insisting that Apple Lossless was the way to go. Coming from a visual effects background, my assumption is that you would always want to stay as close to the source material as possible, so AIFF seemed smart at the time.
I have no problem with the size of the files or the storage required. I want to keep everything as open as possible for whichever home distribution route I end up taking.
Am I missing something here?
Thanks and happy holidays!
-Scott
Sometime later, I wandered into a well known home theatre boutique in Los Angeles and the rep scoffed at my AIFF choice, insisting that Apple Lossless was the way to go. Coming from a visual effects background, my assumption is that you would always want to stay as close to the source material as possible, so AIFF seemed smart at the time.
I have no problem with the size of the files or the storage required. I want to keep everything as open as possible for whichever home distribution route I end up taking.
Am I missing something here?
Thanks and happy holidays!
-Scott
4 responses Add your response