B&W Change to download format

I agree, but I have to process the flac > wav, so still a single command to convert.

Still, strange choice - I assume they decided on this for meta-data reasons?

M

Strange indeed - hate to convert in the process, I miss to see the reason for this....

AIFF is not proprietary and actually supports embedding tag information in the file. I prefer it to WAV. Go forth and rejoice!

Its a lossless format,  the basic of which is WAV.   IMO Naim is happier (sounds better) with WAV as thats what its OS is designed around,    & rather than transcoding AIFF (or FLAC or ALAC) I only use WAV,   & if there is no choice then I use dBpoweramp to convert any AIFF or FLAC that I buy into WAV.        Bottom line is there's not much difference,  but I really don't understand B&W's reason or choice of just that one format.

Many thanks to all for replies so far. I've been digging around a little on the WWW and am of the understanding that AIFF was developed by Apple back in 1988 although I'm not sure if Apple still have any rights/control etc over the format. That said WAV was originally developed by IBM and Microsoft in 1991 and again I'm not sure if thse companies retain any rights/control over the WAV format. I'm aware that both formats have LPCM at their heart and that it is a simple process to use a tool such as dBpoweramp to convert between formats - I've been using dBpoweramp for many years for that purpose as well as its other capabilities.

Reading the B&W website I perceived (perhaps wrongly) that one of their reasons for adopting AIFF was that it is easier to embed metadata into AIFF files than WAV files. I must confess that I thought that was a thing of the past as there are many tools that allow you to edit metadata in most formats, WAV included.

All my music is currently in FLAC (transcode to WAV on the fly when playing back) and like Mike-B I convert music if required when I obtain it. I was considering going to WAV only (same thinking as many others on this forum that NAIM likes WAV) but if B&W is the beginning of a move within the music industry, particulalry those who provide music, to a adopt a single format and that format is something else......   

DWO

I don't see any industry move to change to AIFF,  OK B&W say it does metadata better,  but how & better than what.  I get the impression its just to differentiate them from others for marketing purposes, iTunes maybe.  But lets be honest they are a very small player in the music download world.

I also believe the download company's tend to go for FLAC (& AIFF) because they are compressed so take up less bandwidth & time to download.   WAV & the other Apple format ALAC do not compress.    

The larger & most popular download sites Qobuz are FLAC,  HighResAudio are FLAC or ALAC & HDTracks have a customer choice of WAV FLAC ALAC & AIFF,    Linn is customer choice FLAC & ALAC,   Naim are WAV on 24-bit & WAV or FLAC with 16-bit.    

AIFF is uncompressed - basically the equivalent to WAV.  I guess B&W have decided that AIFF handles metadata better than WAV.

Whoops Correction    ..............    I also believe the download company's tend to go for FLAC (& ALAC) because they can be compressed so take up less bandwidth & time to download.   WAV & AIFF do not compress.

Good decision! Easier to carry metadata on AIFF and it's uncompressed equivalent (from Apple) to WAV.

I have several hundred hi-res audio albums - if I had a choice, I always went for AIFF.

For example when setting an HD Tracks account, one is asked to choose a default download format.

Adam Zielinski posted:

Good decision! Easier to carry metadata on AIFF and it's uncompressed equivalent (from Apple) to WAV.

So that must be where Naim have got it so badly wrong by only selling 24-bit in WAV,  we must tell them  !!!     

Mike-B posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

Good decision! Easier to carry metadata on AIFF and it's uncompressed equivalent (from Apple) to WAV.

So that must be where Naim have got it so badly wrong by only selling 24-bit in WAV,  we must tell them  !!!     

Of course

Actually WAV files are apparently easier to handle and AIFF can be temprememtal at times. I had one issue with a file name - manual change and all sorted. Phil sorted it for me.

I don't understand the WAV metadata issue. You can use ID3v2 tags on WAV like pretty much every other file type, and streamers all pick them up, it's not non-standard. (Ignoring the Qobuz download challenges, that's not a standards issue.) Naim may have gone another way with the HDX (and possibly later servers) by being early, but having retagged all of my HDX WAVs with MP3tag and ripped newer stuff with DBPoweramp I have files that are accessible by Qbs, HDX, NDX, PC and IPhone/IPAD. So WAV tags seem standard to me.

Exactly   ................   WAV (.wav) is an original Microsoft/IBM audio file format & can embed any kind of metadata such as ID3 tags & XMP.      I edit & manipulate WAV without any problems whatsoever, I am at a loss to understand where this myth about WAV not carrying / has problems / with metadata comes from.  I can understand choosing FLAC because of it lossless compression & disc space reasons.  Maybe the Apple related formats have something for iTunes users.     

I wouldn't worry, AIFF is almost identical to WAV as they both use similar RIFF container constructs. The one  big format difference when supporting lossless PCM (which is what WAV and AIFF  formats are generally used for but don't have to be) is the default format  for PCM in AIFF has its bit order reversed compared to the usual order in WAV. Both support meta data, but AIFF only supports a subset which is what we commonly use for consumer music media where as  WAV also has meta data for more industrial and production purposes which we don't tend to use in the consumer world.

One other difference is that Apple Computers don't tend to read many of the WAV container data types such as metadata, possibly because WAV was developed by IBM/Microsoft? I don't know. So AIFF can be more portable for consumer use where there are Apple devices.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

One other difference is that Apple Computers don't tend to read many of the WAV container data types such as metadata, possibly because WAV was developed by IBM/Microsoft? I don't know. So AIFF can be more portable for consumer use where there are Apple devices.

Thatt's not strictly true - Apple OS (at least current) will read WAV metadata with ease.

From my own observations: I'm yet to find a commercial download in WAV which is tagged properly, so that it's automatically picked up by my Naim server and streamer. And I only had one problem with one file in AIFF. Perhaps I've been luckly wiht AIFFs and unlucky with WAVs.... who knows....

Adam Zielinski posted:

From my own observations: I'm yet to find a commercial download in WAV which is tagged properly, so that it's automatically picked up by my Naim server and streamer.

I believe its Naim servers that have the problem Adam,  for whatever reason Naim modify their WAV rips for use in US & HDX (I think they strip out something) & have trouble reading properly tagged outsourced WAV.      

I download WAV from Naim & HDtracks (& from anyone else who offers a choice of WAV) or dBpoweramp convert whatever format is on offer.    I can't recall Naim & HDTracks files ever needing editing to get my NAS to read or display them.

Mike-B posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

From my own observations: I'm yet to find a commercial download in WAV which is tagged properly, so that it's automatically picked up by my Naim server and streamer.

I believe its Naim servers that have the problem Adam,  for whatever reason Naim modify their WAV rips for use in US & HDX (I think they strip out something) & have trouble reading properly tagged outsourced WAV.      

I download WAV from Naim & HDtracks (& from anyone else who offers a choice of WAV) or dBpoweramp convert whatever format is on offer.    I can't recall Naim & HDTracks files ever needing editing to get my NAS to read or display them.

Good to know Mike. Thanks for that. 

My recent 'bad' experience of WAVs was a Radiohead's album, downloaded from the band's website.

Officially, WAV does not support embedding metadata in the file. Yes, you can do it, but not all programs are setup to read it well. 

Why do you think files ripped to a UnitiServe have no metadata embedded? That's right! Because Naim rip them properly, according to spec, and keep the metadata in separate files. 

AIFF and WAV are equivalent otherwise - they are just wrappers for PCM data. AIFF was Apple's implementation and WAV was Microsoft's. 

years ago I spent lots of on with flac and wav .loss of meta data was a pain   always flac  change on the fly to naim stramer.  sorted  years ago   .a file is file aint it