WAV vs. AIFF


Is there any benefits/disadvantages of one of these over the other? I have read the one advantage of AIFF is that it carries meta tags, but are there any other differences? WAV is said to be an exact match of the original, what makes AIFF different that Apple felt the need to create it?
brianmgrarcom
WAV and AIFF are just raw data files and should perform the same. WAV can hold tags but there is no agreed standard. AIFF has got a standard for storing tags.

Audiofun is right. The argument that FLAC and ALAC are bit perfect is like saying I am a great pianist because I can play all the notes on the keyboard - it isn't enough. The bits need to be delivered with very low levels of distortion of the waveform that represents those bits to avoid jitter problems, and one of the ways to improve that with computer audio is to reduce the number of tasks being performed concurrently by the PC - like unpacking files. The difference in sound between AIFF and ALAC does however differ depending on the Mac used and how it is set up.
I think this was a good discussion and hopefully some of us acquired some useful information :) Love my hobby!!!
Well I had some one help me with a double blind test....

Before the test I "knew" that AIFF was the best... But I failed the test at about 50%. It was very very hard to tell any difference between lossless and AIFF. Many times I would say one sounded better than the other only to have been comparing the same track.

I used a mac min-toslink-DAC1-sennhize 650 headphones for most of the testing.

These days I don't really care if I ripp to lossless or AIFF. I have a big collection of about 26,000 songs and drive space is still not an issue. If you use and iPhone ( typing on now) or iPod lossless works out much better. If it were for home use only and AIFF give you a warm fuzzy feeling go for it.

i've compared .wav and .flac and couldn't tell the difference. the biggest issue with .wav or any file that you store on a computer is data corruption. .wav files have absolutely no built in error correction so the data can theoretically become minutely corrupted though still play and you might never know. .flac has built in error correction, if it's corrupted at all, it won't play. the pianist analogy is specious at best. any modern and well-maintained computer would have no issue decoding the data from .flac or .alac files.