Same audio, just formatted differently.
I am not aware of substantial metadata issues, aiff having very little
of it that differs,*/UNLESS/***you are starting with a bwf variant of
wav file, which potentially could have quite a bit of information
stripped off in conversion to AIFF. In that case, consider what you or
your equipment have included as metadata and whether it will be missed.
To find out more, I suggest consulting online documentation/standards.
On 2/28/14 1:56 PM, John Schroth wrote:
> Could someone provide any logical reasons why one would use AIFF over
> WAV as the digital master preservation file format? (leaving
> compressed variants of AIFF off the table for this discussion). I have
> a client that has asked for AIFF format masters instead of WAV. I'm
> not sure if this is actually best for them but I don't digitize to
> AIFF format files - I have always digitized to WAV format.
> Since AIFF format was developed by Apple a while back - is it still
> considered a proprietary format?
> What happens if you capture to WAV then save the file off as AIFF or
> the opposite, is there anything lost or changed in the audio file or
> with the attached metadata?
> Thanks in advance for any thoughts/input.
> John Schroth
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
> protection is active.
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
159 Sapsucker Woods Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
[log in to unmask]
To interpret and conserve the Earth's biological diversity through research, education, and citizen science focused on birds.