At Iconica Vegas, we weren't looking for another converter. Then a colleague brought in a Prism Sound Lyra 2, and we heard something that made us reconsider what we were using.
The Converter That Changed Our Perspective
After years of working with professional conversion, converter shootouts can become a frustrating exercise in diminishing returns. Differences aren't always obvious, and even when they're audible, they're not necessarily worth the expense of another piece of equipment.
At Iconica Vegas, our hybrid mixing setup already included a Burl Audio B2 Bomber for analog-to-digital conversion and a Dangerous D-Box+ for digital-to-analog conversion. We had conducted our own comparisons and hadn't found a compelling reason to invest in another converter.
Then a recording colleague started bringing his Prism Sound Lyra 2 into the studio. He would bypass our Apollo interface entirely, taking the vocal recording chain directly into the Lyra. According to him, its conversion was noticeably clearer and more detailed.
I was skeptical. But when he suggested an A/B comparison, I gave it a shot.
And for the first time in a while, I heard a difference that made me reconsider my assumptions.
Hearing the Difference
Switching between the Dangerous D-Box+ and the Lyra 2, the most immediate impression wasn't simply that one sounded more detailed than the other. The entire presentation of the music seemed to change.
The low end initially felt less substantial through the Lyra. There was less of that familiar fullness and boominess, but the bass seemed tighter and more controlled.
Up top, hi-hats and frequencies around 8 kHz and above sounded smoother. The sharper edges softened without the sound becoming dull or losing its detail.
But the most striking difference was the overall sonic image.
The best way to describe it is the difference between watching an IMAX film from the back of the theater and watching a conventional movie from the middle rows. You're still seeing the same picture, but your perception of the entire scene changes. There's a greater sense of perspective, and you're taking in more of the overall image rather than feeling as though everything is pushed toward you.
That's an exaggerated analogy, but it captures something about the Lyra's presentation. The mix seemed to pull back slightly, revealing a more spacious, cohesive picture.
This wasn't a night-and-day transformation. It was subtler than that, but the difference was discernible.
The next question was more important: What good is better conversion if the improvement only exists in your monitoring chain?
Beyond Monitoring: Putting the Lyra to Work
Better monitoring can lead to better mixing decisions. How we perceive low-frequency balance, transient detail, and high-frequency energy influences every EQ, compression, and saturation decision we make.
A tighter-feeling low end, for example, can make it easier to shape the relationship between the kick and bass without overcorrecting for boominess in the monitoring presentation.
But I wanted to take things further. I wanted the Lyra's sonic presentation to become part of the actual record, not just something I heard while mixing.
Fortunately, the Lyra 2 offers four analog outputs, giving us additional routing flexibility in our hybrid setup.