Find the best product and price, effortlessly.
Discover deals on the best products
Shure SE215 vs AfterShokz Trekz (2015)
AfterShokz Trekz Titanium AS600 (2015)

The Shure SE215 is an exemplary product and one of the very best In-Ear Monitors that cost around $100.
The AfterShokz Trekz Titanium AS600 (2015), however, doesn't seem to have enough data available for us to be able to draw any meaningful conclusions.
The Shure SE215 has impressed reviewers from two sources that are among the most highly trusted on the internet, namely tuck.com and SoundGuys. It did great in their objective hands-on roundups - it earned the "Best Earbud Headphones" and "Ranked 2 out of 5" awards from tuck.com and SoundGuys, respectively. That's high praise from such reputable sources.
Moving on to the AfterShokz Trekz Titanium AS600 (2015): it did great in a number of roundups that were conducted by sources that perform their own hands-on testing, such as Popular Mechanics, MakeUseOf, nerdtechy.com, and Android Central - it was dubbed "Ranked 2 out of 8" by Popular Mechanics, "Ranked 2 out of 7" by MakeUseOf, and "Ranked 1 out of 2" by nerdtechy.com, which indicates that it's worthy of consideration.
We also performed a thorough Shure SE215 vs. AfterShokz Trekz Titanium AS600 (2015) review score analysis - it turns out that all of the sources that have tested both In-Ear Monitors, including Techradar, preferred the Shure SE215 over the AfterShokz Trekz Titanium AS600 (2015).
Out of all the sources that reviewed them, the Shure SE215 turned out to be most loved by SoundGuys, which gave it a score of 8.3, whereas the AfterShokz Trekz Titanium AS600 (2015) got its highest, 8, rating from reviewers at Digitaltrends.
Lastly, we compared their review averages and found that the Shure SE215 did much better than the majority of its competitors, with an average review score of 7.8 out of 10, compared to the 7.7 overall average of In-Ear Monitors in general, whereas the AfterShokz Trekz Titanium AS600 (2015) hasn't managed to perform quite as well, with an average rating of 6.8.
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing
analysis
Testing