You'll never get everyone to agree on what is best, so educate yourself the best you can.
I think there is a lot more to digital than is known by the average guy, talking of myself; I have this belief based partly due to the vast differences in results reported.
I have compared Apple Lossless, AIFF and WAV and have not been able to discern a difference. Making a change in my system recently, I have copied some files once again to see if I feel the same and while I haven't spent much time comparing them yet, the little I did compare yeilded no difference. (Let me note that while Apple Lossless is a compressed format, it is in a manner where is can be converted back, so no data is truly lost.)
Those that claim to hear a difference I have come to wonder if it has more to do with the equipment used, where certain conversions are done better via some brands, designs, etc.
One pet peeve of mine is that the iPod is talked of in a negative light, such as, "an iPod is not going to compete with a nice in home CD", this I do not agree with, nor due a number of reviewers.
Most are aware of the Wadia iTransport which bypasses the DAC within the iPod, making the iPod a hard drive based source. Now we can go in many directions here, but there are already many threads on most of those subjects.
To finally address your question directly, I'd chose Apple Lossless or AIFF. AIFF is Apple's version of WAV, so the file is full size, but the benefit of AIFF over WAV is its ability to carry metatags along with all your music so you have cover art, etc. These two formats will allow you to easily store your music, per your request. Apple Lossless will take approximately half the space of AIFF, it is your call.
I think there is a lot more to digital than is known by the average guy, talking of myself; I have this belief based partly due to the vast differences in results reported.
I have compared Apple Lossless, AIFF and WAV and have not been able to discern a difference. Making a change in my system recently, I have copied some files once again to see if I feel the same and while I haven't spent much time comparing them yet, the little I did compare yeilded no difference. (Let me note that while Apple Lossless is a compressed format, it is in a manner where is can be converted back, so no data is truly lost.)
Those that claim to hear a difference I have come to wonder if it has more to do with the equipment used, where certain conversions are done better via some brands, designs, etc.
One pet peeve of mine is that the iPod is talked of in a negative light, such as, "an iPod is not going to compete with a nice in home CD", this I do not agree with, nor due a number of reviewers.
Most are aware of the Wadia iTransport which bypasses the DAC within the iPod, making the iPod a hard drive based source. Now we can go in many directions here, but there are already many threads on most of those subjects.
To finally address your question directly, I'd chose Apple Lossless or AIFF. AIFF is Apple's version of WAV, so the file is full size, but the benefit of AIFF over WAV is its ability to carry metatags along with all your music so you have cover art, etc. These two formats will allow you to easily store your music, per your request. Apple Lossless will take approximately half the space of AIFF, it is your call.