Does anyone know of a list of textual differences for all of tanach or at least the chumash between the Aleppo Codex (Keter Aram Soba/Tzova) and the more common text? I already have such a list for Megillas Esther. Nikkud and Ta'amim are not necessary. A link to a plain-text or html version of the more common Torah text would also be useful. Since Mechon Mamre already has the Keter (Breuer) online I could make the comparison myself.
You should look in the front of each volume of the common Daat Mikra series on Tanach (the pink volumes from Mosad HaRav Kook). At the end of their introduction to the book at hand just before the text starts, they bring Rav Breuer's listing of all the textual variants (including trop and nikkud, but not parsha breaks) between the major manuscripts available (including Aleppo, Leningrad, Sason, Cairo, the Venice printing, Minchat Shai and various other Mesorot and collections of Ben Naftali and Ben Asher), as well as which one he chose in writing his version of Tanach which is used in that set.
If you can't find a print copy, the entire set is available online through Otzar HaChochma. Unfortunately it is subscription only, but the first 40 pages of each book are free. So here is a link to Daat Mikra on Bamidbar, where the introduction is short enough that you can see the textual variants listed starting on page 31 through the end of the free part.
One definite difference between European derived texts and the Aleppo Codex appears in Yeshayahu 9:6.
The latter has the first two words of this verse as לם רבה. The former, on the other hand, have both these words combined in the Ksiv version - as one word, with the Mem Sofit in the middle of this first word, like this: לםרבה. (The only place in Tanach with such a strange configuration!)
The latter unique word configuration is mentioned in old commentaries, such as the Radak and Even Ezer. In the gemora Sanhedrin 94a, Rashi too makes mention of this unique feature.
Yet the Aleppo Codex is an older version, seen by the Rambam.
It seems that both versions of chumash are very old and that what one set of scholars saw was not seen by the other, thus the commentaries' commentaries.