I use AIF (Some high resoloution as well )and why you should compress Music files ? This days storage is reasonable in cost !
Aim still believe don’t mess around with the original file .
1 Like
Do you think you have the original file? Because you don’t. You have, at best, a copy of a copy of a copy. There are no issues with converting AIFF files to FLAC and back. It’s no different than making a copy except that is also losslessly compressed.
There is no reason to waste space so why not compress your library. It makes it much easy to backup.
5 Likes
It makes them feel better, secure in the knowledge that them bits are original bits 
2 Likes
Nothing to do to feel better its always better to have a file that has not to be converted at least in my opinion .I do have still over1300 CD’s that i ripped to my Apple .As you may know Apple has as well a loss-less file format very similar to FLAC that can be converted back to AIF . It was convenient when ex.hard-drive were expensive .Been a audio fan since 1969 I went trough lots of various music systems&files and each had some advantages and disadvantages. As i have many CD’s ripped and many high resolution files some in Flac ,some in DSD I noticed that CD’s sounded better to me (with a decant CD player )then most downloaded files .I checked with some Audio friends of mine and most of them came to the same conclusion. For portable music I use a DAP player that can play any music file I still think that a DAP player sound better then a HP and bluetooth sounded even less convincing .Nothing wrong with Flac but so is AIF and Wave .
Using AIF and/or WAV is perfectly fine if that happens to be your preference. There just isn’t any technical reason to prefer them over FLAC or ALAC.
Do what makes you happy 
3 Likes
The very likehood of losing data from a lossless compression system has a typical ratio of 2:1 due to the typical compression ratio. Even though FLAC encodes them into separate frames, a loss of few frames after it is decoded is increased by a factor 2. This is a fact.
For archiving I will always go for the raw format but for playback, lossless compression is better coz it reduces the bit rate and bandwidth needed to transmit and store.
CD rips are not data that needs to be archived because it’s not available anywhere else. It’s just convenient to keep it safe because you don’t want to rip them again. Of course one should have backups of all important data, but in the unlikely event of data corruption, I don’t really care if it’s corrupted or corrupted twice as much. It’s still corrupted and I wan’t a file that is not corrupted, not a slightly less corrupted one.
Also with Roon it does not reduce bitrate or bandwidth requirements (between core and bridge) as everything is decrypted at the core before transmission. Between NAS and core it of course will. Also if you are using core as the output, then also, but it kinda defeats the purpose.
1 Like
Did a rip in WAV - played it against FLAC - could not hear any difference - thanx 4 explaining some technical background though 
2 Likes
your kit clearly isn’t up to the task, or perhaps it’s your hearing 
Any decent system worth its salt would sound different with every change in underlying file format. Bits are not just bits. Really good systems wil resolve differences between WAV, FLAC, AIFF and any other lossless format you care to mention. 
Haha - I can live with that and I feel my system and hearing are just fine 
You forgot playback software, operating system, filesystem format, storage device connection, and brand of memory. 
1 Like
Don’t forget type of memory too - ECC ram disrupts the P and T in prat.
Thats nonsense… MQA is in a Flac wrapper and is authenticated. If Flac damaged the file this would not be the case regardless of any thoughts on MQA
What’s nonsense? Most of this thread is nonsense.
2 Likes
Sigh… So much disinformation on the internet…
This difference between WAV and FLAC is the cable they’re sent through.
Everything else is just noise.
4 Likes
I wanted to reply when the OP first created this topic but when I came back a 2nd time there was already 15 or so replies.
I wanted to post - This is going to be really interesting! Can’t wait to see what this gins up.
–MD
Again, you are wrong. Using compression does not increase the likelihood of losing data. It can affect what happens to the data if there is corruption of the file. File corruption on HDD and SSD storage is extremely rare. If it were not, computers could not be used for any mission critical applications.
Unfortunately, no matter how much you try to dispel the nonsense there’s always a knowledgeable genius or two out there out there that knows better. Science be damned.
2 Likes
The “knowledgeable genius” is less an issue than the “discerning connoisseur.” Because “everything matters.”
AJ
3 Likes
Often the same person(s).