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
This debate about which encoder is better wav or apple lossless could go on forever. The best thing to do is to import your cd in both wav and apple lossess and listen for yourself. I just prefer wav encoder for my cd transfers, to me i can sometimes here an audible difference. Wav and apple lossless are both hi quality encoders.
That means wav is copying 99.99% of the information on the cd disk and apple lossless doesn't because the file size is less than half of wav. So apple lossless is not really lossless because it is cmpressed.
Armyvet, Dtc explained what I was getting at very well, much better than I. Your comments above are the "issue" I was getting at as incorrect.

First, why is .wav only copying 99.99% and not a full 100% (To me this is analog thinking.)

Second, as Dtc stated so well, the Apple Lossless file size may be smaller but it has no less information.

Brian
Brianmgrarcom, I will say this both wav and apple lossless are the two best way to import your cd collection. By the way 99.99% equals 100%
Jax2 - I have been wanting to get Pop Pop for a while so this seemed like a good time. A lot of the music I listen to (50s/60s jazz and female jazz vocalist) often does not have great sound stage, so I thought I would eliminate that variable and go with what you were using. I recently did a comparison of my PC with a McIntosh 301 CD with top end McIntosh equipment - MDA 1000 DAC, pre, tube power and speakers. Used 301 as a transport so both player and PC went through the DAC. On a lot of my music there was little difference between my PC and the McIntosh 301. However my dealer pulled out some of his favorite test tracks and then we cound definitely hear a soundstage difference. My PC was more forward and a little more detailed that the McIntosh CD player. I liked the PC, he liked the McIntosh. The differences were comparable to listening to CD players from different vendors.

I did try comparing the bits of some EAC rips converted to Apple lossless and then back to wave. Using EAC to compare the original and the twice converted file EAC reported no differences in the files. Also tried several tracks ripped with iTunes to Apple lossless and then converted to wave by iTunes. Again, EAC compare showed they were the same as the EAC ripped track. Next step is some detailed listening which I hope to do this weekend.

Does anyone know of a free ftp server site that allows people to exchange large files? There used to be ones that you could just access through a browser without having to set up server software, but I have not used one in a while. That would make trying different files easier.
Jax2 - I have been wanting to get Pop Pop for a while so this seemed like a good time. A lot of the music I listen to (50s/60s jazz and female jazz vocalist) often does not have great sound stage, so I thought I would eliminate that variable and go with what you were using.

Cool - I think you'll like her. Hey, if those are your tastes, here's another outstanding female jazz vocalist who made her name in the late 60's. The CD is from 2008 though: Norma Winstone, Distances on ECM. Recording is outstanding, as is soundstage. Highly recommended if you like that genre.