Library & files

WAV and AIFF

WAV and AIFF are uncompressed audio containers — the raw samples, no encoding. They sound identical to each other and differ mainly in how they store tags and which software wrote them.

Measured in real DJ libraries

AIFF outnumbers WAV in real DJ libraries — 6.6% against 4.9%.

Same audio, different wrapper, and the thing that decides it is metadata rather than sound. AIFF carries ID3 tags the way an MP3 does; WAV’s tagging has always been the ragged one, and a library that has been through a couple of software migrations tends to end up on the side that kept its artist and key fields.

6.6%

AIFF

4.9%

WAV

5.2%

FLAC, for contrast

16.7%

All lossless

Updated daily from Rekordbox collections DJs have imported to Mixgraph. Method: what a tag actually holds.

Why it matters

The practical difference is metadata, not audio. AIFF has carried tags reliably for longer, WAV support has historically been patchier across software, and a DJ library lives or dies on whether the artist, title and key survive a move between programs.

The audio difference is nothing, which is worth saying plainly because a lot of energy goes into the question. Both hold the same samples at the same rate; a conversion between them is lossless in both directions.

Frequently asked

Does AIFF sound better than WAV?+

No. Both are uncompressed containers holding identical samples, and converting between them changes nothing about the audio.

Which should DJs use, WAV or AIFF?+

Whichever your software tags reliably. Metadata that survives a library move matters far more than a container choice that has no effect on sound.

How big is an uncompressed track?+

At CD rate, about 61.4 MB for a track of median length in this catalog — roughly four and a half times a 320 kbps file of the same track.

Related terms