FLAC or AIFF? your choice for importing to Itunes.

If you are planning to use USB, then FLAC has the worst imact on SQ of the losless formats. AIFF is not as good as .wav, but a lot better than FLAC.

I will not argue about this. Yes, FLAC is bit-perfect when data compares are done, but it compromises SQ when played back real-time. There have been a number of studies including the one in TAS that support this.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

It depends what you're going to do with it. If you send it wireless or to network Bridge/DAC then it doesn't matter (as long as playback program recognizes format). In case of Itunes+Airport Express, for instance, it is even better to keep it ALAC compressed since Itunes uses this format in transmission to Airport Express. Using AIFF would require additional processing.

Respecting the opinion of some I believe that there is no audible difference between FLAC, ALAC, WAV or AIFF. If you are using iTunes then your options, without a third party software involved, are WAV, AIFF or ALAC. When it comes to metadata my opinion is that eliminates WAV. My library is AIFF. Today I simply think there is no issue or concern with storage space and see virtually no reason for even lossless compressed files. However, looking to the future with music servers and digital players being offered by many manufacturers, FLAC may be the very best option at this time for portability and compatibility.

Sorry Steve, the TAS article is very suspect. Stereophile rejected it before TAS published it. I hate to say, but these guys probably would have heard a difference in sound depending on the phase of the moon. That report is open to a lot of question. I would not use it to support your position.

Dtc - some of their findings, not all, are consistent with what I have heard myself. I recommend to avoid FLAC if you are using USB or Firewire.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio