2. digital
  3. 1234444992

WAV or Apple Lossless Encoder?

We plan on purchasing a Wadia 170i Transport to use with our Museatex Bidat. As we have several hundred CD's that we want to transfer, we want to begin the process of downloading them into our itunes library. I was surprised when I read the Wadia owners manual that it appears to recommend using the WAV encoder and does also mention mention Apple Lossless as an alternative. We use a PC rather than a MAC (sorry) and I know that WAV was originally developed for the PC, but from every thing that I've read, Lossless is the superior solution. Anyone compare these two and notice a difference? I only want to do this once.
conedison8

Showing 2 responses by audioengr

audioengr
3,282 posts
 
Peter is not the only one that has heard this anomaly by a long shot. I have received a number of reports of the same thing. The problem happens even when the data is streamed with WiFi to AirPort Express or AppleTV.

If the file is ripped directly to Apple Lossless with iTunes, the quality is inferior to the same file ripped with EAC and then converted to Apple Lossless with iTunes.

If the ALAC data is converted back to .wav, the files compare, but this does not tell the whole story. For instance, one file might be 24-bit and the other 16-bit, which makes a big difference in quality. They will still compare.

Steve N.
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
Look, I am a EE with over 30 yeard design experience. We can debate the theory and the science until the cows come home. The fact is there are differences here, and comparing .wav to .wav files does not explain it.

One person that did this experiment repeated it with a Transport rather than the Pace-Car reclocker and concluded that if the jitter is very high, you really can't tell the difference. It's when the jitter gets really low that the difference is obvious. The Pace-Car is only a FIFO, it does not change the data in any way.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
More to discover