Shure KSE1500 Review – A Revolutionary Approach In Its Class

Shure KSE1500

£2500

8.9

Sound Signature

9.8/10

Build Quality/Design/Functionality

9.0/10

Value

8.0/10

Pros

• New level of reference sound signature for portable audio. Very detailed sound presentation.
• Solid build quality and simple to use with a classic design.
• Micro detail outstanding and excellent dynamic transitioning.

Cons

• Quite large and makes stack a bit bulky.
• Cable a little thick in terms of ergonomics.
• Price out of some people reach but then again this is a revolutionary product,

 4 Source test for KSE1500

This to me was the hardest part of the test. Below is the list of products and a general summary of how each performed:

1. Calyx Mreferred overall source due to the its warmer sound and UI. If UI do not matter it has the same overall tonality as Venturecraft Valoq. Alongside with Mojo I consider these three pairing on par on most ground. Mojo offered more fine tuning, a little more better midrange. If I was to be perfectly honest Mojo sounds much better than all gears paired below but I cannot say whether for most it will be enough considering how poorly it stacks.
2. Venturecraft Valoq: refer to calyx M
3. AK120: Lean, neutral and at times little more treble oriented, similar to the DD socket one albeit less bright. In terms of detail I could not hear any more or less detail compared to A16 walkman which was a bit of a surprise for me. A16 walkman produce the same level of micro/macro detail and perhaps a better overall experience due to a considerable more superior UI.
4. Lotoo Paw Gold: Neutral, very detail sound. Can come across as cold for some listeners. It offered the same level of detail as HUGO but HUGO had more warmth. Same soundstage perhaps the largest alongside HUGO perhaps due to its lack of warmth.
5. Chord HUGO: This was perhaps the  largest disappointment. Not that it sound bad, no in fact it sounded fine. I was expecting for sound to scale more. The  colder sound of Hugo compared to calyx M, Mojo perhaps makes it little less favourable pairing with KSE1500. I have heard HUGO sound much better, to me some of the magic of HUGO is lost in KSE1500, where is that wide soundstage? What causes it I do not know.
6. Chord Mojo: Refer to calyx M.
7. Shanling M3: Similar sound as DD socket 1, more detail than AK120. Issue is that it can clip the audio and you are required to reduce the input gain setting on the KSE1500 to fix this. In general this pairing cannot be faulted if one wishes for a more detailed pairing but not as warm sounding as calyx M.
8. DD Socket 1: Refer to M3
9. Colorfy C4: The sound was too bright, lacked detail and I do not recommend it
10. Sony NWZ-A16 walkman: refer to AK!20
11. xDuoo X3: To me this pairing also was another surprise just like the A16 walkman. This little thing was able to perform in the same league as the AK120, M3 and better than the C4. In terms of stacking this was the second best best stacking after the A16 walkman

So what causes all this mix result? It makes me just feel that perhaps while KSE1500 been a transparent IEM at end of the day it is a closed back IEM. This means in larger it can only sound as open as an IEM and therefore when paired with HUGO which has the potential to sound more open with other gear the pairing will cause a disappointment for those who are very familiar with what HUGO has to offer.

I think the strength of KSE is in its ability to effortlessly extract detail from any analog signal that it is paired with. With certain pairing like Lotoo PAW Gold one might get more detail from the sound source but is it enough to warrant dropping the internal DAC and sacrifice on portability? That is for you to decide but to me the internal DAC or the unit as a complete package can perform as good as AK120, xDuoo x3 andA16 pairing.

If one doesn’t care about how it stacks and want the best Chord mojo and Chord Hugo offers the best source. However the warmer tonality of Mojo to me outshines chord HUGO.

Top to bottom: Sony NWZA16, Chord mojo, AK120,SKE1500, Lotoo Paw Gold, Venturecraft Valoq, Shanling M3, DD socket , Colorfly C4, Chord HUGO.

Top row, left to right: DD socket 1, Chord HUGO, colorfly C4, Venturecraft Valoq
Bottom raw, left to right: Shanling M3, KSE1500, Lotoo Paw Gold, AK120, Sony NWZ A16

5 Conclusion: The difficulty of testing the performance of a transparent sound and the future wishes I have for KSE1500

As mentioned before a transparent sound is one that simply has no particular characteristic of its own. The role of a transparent sound is to try to as realistically produce the sound of the analog signal that it is feed. If I was to describe KSE1500 using three word it would be transparent, non fatiguing.
So how can an IEM that has no sound of its own be described, that is the million dollar question. KSE is able to reproduce nicely mastered track as good as any other TOTL headphone and what makes KSE special is in how it deals with the more compressed music.  It is able to somehow better present those compressed sound by bringing about a little more breathing room which results in a better reproduction of music to the end user.

Will KSE be an endgame unit? I do not see a reason for it not to be so but in reality I think the safer answer is no. Just with all things the key is variety. Transparent sound sometimes can do with a bit of extra warmth which perhaps the sound track lacks and this is in large why high end loud speakers owners pair their solid state fancy mono-blocks amps with tube preamps and various EQing hardware. The beauty of transparent IEM is the ability for the end users to have more of control on fine tuning of the sound.

What I like to see in the future is more accessories from Shure and more collaboration from them with the third party designers. As stated before pairing with Chord Hugo which is a proven product over at head-fi made me wonder perhaps the reason why the pairing with Hugo did not yield in a better production could be because of the nature of the IEM itself however there is no reason for me not to assume perhaps the amp might be creating a bottle neck. As there was no other way for me to test this assumption so till we can test the KSE IEM with some after market amp it will remain only an assumption.

Perhaps Shure can produce a new amp model with a larger battery life or better with a model using a more an up-to-date DAC chip. Not known the DAC chip is one thing, knowing that it is an older model chip would naturally make the market which is craving for the most up to date design a little uneasy. After all we are paying for revolutionary design, why go with an arguably outdated DAC?

What I like to see in the future is Shure collaboration with various DAP/amp makers. For instances AK and JH audio collaboration resulted in creations of a number of product that are received quiet favourably.  On head-fi Fiio rep Joe Blogg showed that Fiio is interested in producing an amp module for their flagship DAP Fiio X7. I don’t now about you guys but that idea is truly exciting, it fits this revolutionary product. It would be the first truly portable electrostatic setup that requires nothing but a DAP to power it and playback music all in one unit.

Partnership with amazing electrostatic amp makers like cavalli audio and headampcan only create more attention with a positive long term impact. The idea of selling the IEM alone and giving the end user the freedom to pick and choice their own package could be more liberating. But that can only be possible if the after market is willing to endorse the KSE IEM unit which I think will come down to Shure interest to work with the after market movement.

One can only remain hopeful and of course it goes without saying my review is strongly my own view, you can only decide for yourself.

Disclosure: This unit was a paid unit, I in no way or shape am I endorsed by any company or anyone.