AIFF VS AAC
The ultimate comparison guide. Understanding the technical differences between Audio Interchange File Format and Advanced Audio Coding.
AIFF
aiffUncompressed PCM audio container favored by studios and broadcasters.
Pros
- Studio-grade quality
- Sample-accurate editing
- Stores loop & tempo metadata
Cons
- Huge file sizes
- Not optimal for streaming
- Limited tagging compared to FLAC
AAC
aacSuccessor to MP3 with better sound quality at similar bit rates.
Pros
- Better quality than MP3
- Standard for YouTube/Apple
Cons
- Lossy compression
- Complex licensing
When AIFF wins
Stay with AIFF when you need recording studios or broadcast deliverables. Its strengths center on studio-grade quality and a feature set native to Apple.
When AAC wins
Choose AAC when your workflow prioritizes itunes or youtube audio. It delivers better quality than mp3 plus modern compression perks.
Technical Specifications
| Feature | AIFF | AAC |
|---|---|---|
| MIME Type | audio/aiff | audio/aac |
| Developer | Apple | Bell Labs |
| Release Year | 1988 | 1997 |
| Best For | Recording studios, Broadcast deliverables, Sample libraries | iTunes, YouTube Audio, Streaming |
Need to switch?
Where AIFF still wins
Keep AIFF when you need studio-grade quality and workflows depend on recording studios / broadcast deliverables. Link those teams directly to the converter above so they can ship AAC deliverables without leaving their browser.
- • Reference the .aiff glossary from this page.
- • Embed the conversion CTA in docs, wikis, and onboarding runbooks.
- • Use AAC for itunes while archiving originals as AIFF.
Keep crawlers in the conversion hub
Link this comparison to the relevant tool, glossary, and documentation pages so every crawl discovers a monetizable route.