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
Peter dropped off several files for me to listen to this evening. He didn't tell me much about them. I didn't have my server running at the time and our dogs were playing so we could not listen to them together, so I don't know if my observations are the same as his. I spent about thirty minutes going back and forth between various versions of a rip of Rickie Lee Jones, Bye Bye Blackbird off of "PopPop". I had one of my own which was a WAV ripped in iTunes using Error Correction. Peter provided three files. I could only locate two of the three as the third evidently did not have some critical tags and got sent into oblivion by SlimServer. So of the three files I had, one that he provided sounded significantly different. It seemed to have an improved soundstage with better imaging, more natural vocal presence, and deeper bass. The WAV I'd ripped via iTunes, and the other file he provided sounded quite similar. They did not provide as well defined a soundstage as the one file. I don't know if he was trying to trick me, but I phoned him with the file that stood out to my ears and in my system - he can confirm whether or not my observations paralleled his, or were different. There is no doubt at all that the files he provided sounded different from each other, and that one sounded better than my iTunes WAV rip of the same file. His version of PopPop is the same as mine, but obviously it is a different physical disc, ripped on a different computer.

OK, Peter, was the file that sounded better to me the same as the one that you preferred?
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.
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.

Steve - I may be embarrassing myself here as I still don't know if I'm calling out the same file as Peter, but I did hear a clear difference and I am not using either Airport Express or Apple TV. I am, however using Wifi, but with a Modwright Transporter. As far as I know, Peter was probably using your products (a PaceCar and an Empirical modded Northstar DAC via USB), but he also could have used his Havana DAC...not sure. Neither of us is using an Apple device for conversion. Both of us hear a difference, though I don't know yet whether we agree on what that difference is. There is no doubt at all that the files he provided me sound different and that one sounds superior to the WAV rip I did in iTunes using error correction (which I'd always assumed would be the best means of ripping a file).
Great, I ripped all my cds into itunes with apple's lossless thinking I was getting everything I needed and saving space. Now I have to delete and reload!!
Steve - I do not believe a 24-bit file and a 16-bit file would compare exactly. The extra 8 bits per sample have to be stored somewhere. So I am not sure what you mean by this.

Can someone do a bit compare on the Apple lossless files and see how different they are? As a first pass, do they contain the same number of bytes? (Although you have to be aware of the how the offset is set in EAC and how silence between tracks is handled.)

If there is a difference, then it could be either in the iTunes ripping process or in the wav to Apple lossless conversion. In fact, if a Apple lossless file ripped by iTunes is converted to wav and becomes identical to an EAC wav file, I would conjecture that the iTunes rip was as good as the EAC rip. If you take the iTunes ripped file, oonvert it to wav with iTunes and then convert it back to Apple lossless does it sound different than the original file? Does it bit compare?

Not trying to be difficult. I just want to figure out if the data in these files are different and if so where the difference comes from.