KZ PRX Review 

Intro 

Hello, today I have with me the KZ PRX ($55) from the audio brand KZ Audio. The PRX is actually the latest planar magnetic earphone from a brand that has what’s becoming a long history with the driver tech. Though the words “long history” is kind of a misnomer. The truth is that KZ has been at the planar game for a few years now. However, within that “few years” they’ve released a number of planar sets. Each seemingly better than the last. That’s what they do though. Small incremental changes and improvements is the name of the game for KZ and their sister brand CCA. I’ve reviewed a few of them in the KZ PR1 Hifi (PR1 Hifi Review), the KZ X-HBB PR2 (PR2 Review), and the KZ PR3 (PR3 Review). Like I said, incremental improvements. Each set went through the growing pains of a newer tech for the budget space. Trying to figure it out. Each set had some subjective gripes and while they are very good for the price, there’s still some issues, as with anything. 

Issues

This brings up a growing conversation involving KZ/CCA iems. Well, I shouldn’t say growing, really, they’ve been held beliefs for quite some time by members of the audio community. That is… KZ iems aren’t worth the time, they are cheap, over promised results, exaggerated claims. Folks, folks, listen, I came into this hobby with KZ being my springboard to the rabbit hole. It was KZ that provided sound quality like I’ve never heard at insanely cheap prices. The build quality was always second to none in each sets’ relative price point and the prices were perfect for a person like me who didn’t have two nickels to rub together. Having said all of that, I’ve seen nothing but improvements in KZ products. Always at or near the “top in class” in most price points that they dare enter into. Price to performance is still the key contributing factor in their sales. Basically, I feel you are doing a wild disservice to yourself by neglecting to check out their iems and audio devices because they “exaggerate” their products and because they always hover in the budget sector.

I only review what I enjoy…

Not to toot my own horn, but I have reviewed many different brands, and I hardly find any of them are as consistent as KZ/CCA. Of course, some of their sets don’t exactly hit the nail on the head but seriously, name a brand in the budget space that does. By-and-large KZ crafts and creates most of their iems to compete and by-and-large they certainly do. I have a litany of iems and audio devices I’ve reviewed from them and rarely am I flat out dissatisfied. I’ve said it a bunch of times in my reviews that I “Only review products that I enjoy”. This should tell you right away what I feel about all of the products listed below and should tell you a lot about how I feel about the PRX. Feel free to check out some of these reviews below:  

– AS16 Pro

– VXS

– CRA+

– PR1 Hifi

– EDCX

– Linglong

– ZVX TWS 

– D-Fi

– X-HBB PR2 

– Duo

– EDXS

– AS24

– Krila

– AZ20

– ZAT 

– Rhapsody 

– PR3

–ZSN Pro 2

–CCA Trio

–Symphony 

–Vader

–AS10 Pro 

–Xtra TW

–ZS12 Pro X 

–AS24 Pro

–Carol

Give em’ a break… 

So, as you can see, I’ve had some time testing out KZ/CCA iems and if you’ve spent any time reading any of them, you’ll notice a common theme. That is, price to performance. Their iems are usually good for the price. Are they always tops in class? Well, no. Some are close, and some are very close, but the point is, why dismiss a brand over superficial reasons when they make very good products for the money. Most humans on this planet can afford some KZ iems and what they are getting are solid sets for the price. None of us are made of gold and none of us have money trees growing in our yards either. I guess I’m just saying is… give em’ a break. 

Competition

So, the KZ PRX is up against many great sets under $65 and it won’t be an easy climb to the top. I mention this (competition) in most every review and it holds true for the PRX. Now, priced at only $55 is a huge helping hand and certainly puts the PRX in a rare spot of having one of the lower MSRP’s for a brand new planar magnetic earphone. So, agianst actual “planar magentic” earphones the PRX is in a very good spot. There simply isnt a ton of sets under that price to compete with. It will be interesting to actually hear this set and spend some quality time getting to know them. I think I’m ready to do just that. The KZ PRX everyone…

Non-Affiliated Purchasing Links 

–KZ Audio

PRX Pros

-Build Quality at the price

-Very slick industrial looking design

-Good balance within the mix, slight bass emphasis

-Very good planar bass. Deep, palpable, textured, haptic…nice.

-Midrange is very clean, good note weight

-Treble is much less lifted as previous KZ sets

-Well detailed

-Separation

-Imaging

PRX Cons

-Same type of design language as we’ve seen before (either a pro or a con)

-Some slight planar timbre (should be expected)

-Warm, rich, and weighted lovers will probably not be impressed

-Same accessories as always

Gear used for testing 

–Ifi Go Blu

–EPZ TP50

–Simgot Dew4x

–Aful SnowyNight

–Fiio Q15

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2

–Shanling M6 Ultra

–Shanling H0

Packaging / Accessories 

Unboxing 

I think we are all well aware of what you’ll receive with an under $60 KZ iem. Well, if you don’t know then I’ll put it pretty bluntly… You don’t get a lot. I guess for the price you really shouldn’t expect a lot more either. Basically, the PRX comes in a very small white box with a white sleeve. On the sleeve is a picture of the PRX. You don’t glean much from the box other than some specs on the back like sensitivity and impedance, stuff like that. Anyways, take off the sleeve and you will quickly see the rad looking PRX chilling in a thin plastic tray. Much like all of the KZ sets. Put the earphones to the side and then pull out the thin cardboard separator and underneath you’ll see two sets of white baggies (the most annoying style). One baggie has the cable and the other has the eartips. So that’s about it. I really have zero idea why I add this section in folks. We all know what we are getting. Nothing changes. Same cable, same tips, same style box, same everything. Not that anyone is actually reading this. Not bad at all but KZ could spruce things up a bit. Though I’m perfectly happy with it because it is true that KZ puts most of the money into the earphones themselves so it’s a good trade-off. 

Eartips

KZ provides the same tips as they always have. You get one pair of medium sized foam eartips. They are the slow-rise foam, nice if you enjoy foam tips. I definitely do not like foam tips, but I know plenty of folks who “only” enjoy foams. They are nice. KZ also provides three pairs (S, M, L) of KZ Starline black silicone tips. If you’ve seen any of my reviews, then you probably know that I do think very highly of the Starlines and when you need them, they will be a huge benefit to have in your collection. However, I really don’t think that Starlines benefit the PRX as much as some other sets. I instead opted for the Final Audio E-Tips. I simply found that the fit of the E-Tips was beyond perfect, and they allowed the treble to sound slightly more attenuated. The bass became a hair crisper too. Your mileage may vary of course as each of our ears are obviously different. So anyways, the Starlines are valuable tips to have, and they work great for many situations, but not so much for me and the KZ PRX, in my opinion of course. 

Cable

I won’t spend very long on this because you are getting the same cable that KZ hands out with every set in their arsenal. No matter the price or the style of the set. What you get is the same opaque/white QDC style 2-pin cable terminating with a right angle 3.5 single ended jack. This cable is an SPC (silver-plated copper) and actually isn’t a bad cable at all. It works folks. We in the community speak pretty badly about the cable choice that KZ sends out, I hear it all the time. But in reality, it isn’t a bad cable at all. I simply enjoy a more aesthetically pleasing cable, and I do listen much more to my balanced sources so… cable swap. This cable may also be purchased with a mic attached for phone calls and for calling on your personal assistant. The mic also allows you to play/pause, skip tracks, answer and hang up phone calls. I never get the mic version and so I have zero idea how your voice comes through the mic. 

What’d I use 

So, for this entire review and all of my critical listening I went with (I think?) an SPC brown KBear modular cable. I am having the hardest time remembering who made this stinking cable. However, it works so well with the PRX sonically. Like…perfect. I will. Edit this portion of the review when I figure it out so, please forgive me. At any rate, the cable I chose was about the 15th that I went through, and I have found that cables do matter with this set. For whatever reason. So, I would advise you to take some time and go through some cables. Also, it’s not like there is some enormous difference but this SPC cable just has a cleaner sound. So, take that for what you will. 

Build / Design / Internals / Fit 

Build Quality 

Now we get to the actual build of the PRX. Honestly, the PRX really isn’t very much different from any other KZ planar set. Literally it has the exact same body style and shape. I feel that all of the KZ planars have a fantastic build, always have. So, the body (shell) is made out of 3D printed resin with a medium length nozzle. The nozzle itself is 6mm in width. You’ll notice that the 2-pin connectors are once again the QDC style, so no change there. The faceplates are made out of what I’d assume is aluminum and the faceplates do appear to be open to the atmosphere as there is a mesh covering under the metal grating style faceplate. Now, does the PRX have an open style faceplate? Probably not. But it’s a nice look anyways. So, the build is very good, no complaints. 

Design

Another thing that I’ve always been impressed with is the style of KZ’s planars. All of them are cool looking. Just very dope looking sets. I love the faceplates. Like I said they have what appears to be something along the lines of a metal grating look with three blue lines to add some contrast. KZ also made sure to add three Allen head screws on each corner of the faceplates. Another cool addition. It’s all about subtle little standout features and the PRX nails it. The faceplates have a high polish to them, and they really look great against the clear shells. One thing you’ll notice right away is the fact that the driver enclosure itself is almost a turquoise blue color which adds a slick looking color splash to the design. I also like that KZ put an actual metal nozzle guard rather than the tuning cloth nozzle mesh that they have been using of late. I think they did a nice job. 

Internals

There isn’t much to talk about here as KZ implemented a planar magnetic driver. This one being a fourth generation planar made by KZ themselves. That is one super cool aspect of KZ earphones that a lot of people don’t really understand. KZ/CCA make many of their drivers themselves. This significantly reduces cost and allows KZ to dial in their drivers as well as make upgrades to them. I think it’s a testament to the brand as a whole. Not many brands do such things. Now, I don’t know what size the driver is but I will try to find that info. I can tell you that KZ opted for 14 N52 magnets in total (seven per side) and an electro-plated silver flat voice coil. 

Fit / Comfort 

As far as fit is concerned, I really have no trouble with the PRX. So long as I find tips which seal. Well in my ears the fit is great. The body style of the PRX is one that we’ve seen a thousand time in the past and it is just as ergonomically gifted as those other sets. Now, I of course have zero clue how well this set will fit you but if I was a betting man I’d say they would fit the grand majority of hobbyists. I’d also say that comfort is great too. I never noticed that they were bothering me, even after long periods of listening. 

Drivability / Pairings 

Output power

The KZ PRX is rated with an impedance of roughly around 15 ohms and a sensitivity of a low 94 db’s. I can tell you right now that the PRX is slightly more difficult to drive than most iems in its price bracket but also similar to other planars. Basically, try to get yourself at least a decent Dongle Dac. Something with adequate power will do fine. You can find decent Dongle dacs with 150mw @32 which will drive this set perfectly fine. Of course, I should also state that the PRX desires, yearns for, and truly shines with more power. The more the better, well, to an extent. I use my daps all on high gain and I can tell an easy improvement when I do so. Devices like my iBasso DX240 with almost 1 watt of power, the Shanling M6 Ultra which also has about the same and the Fiio Q15 which almost doubles those. It does help alot. However, even a good dongle dac will suffice. I used the EPZ TP50 on high gain and it was awesome with this set. Or something like the iBasso DC07. Again, it sounds great with the PRX. So, it doesn’t take some $900 dap to bring out the good stuff in the PRX. Just get a decent Dongle Dac, about 100mw @32 at the least and you’ll be good to go. 

Pairings

In my opinion I like a closer to neutral device to listen to the PRX with. I do have some warmer sources which sound perfectly fine but mostly a more neutral source worked great. It kind of offset the heavier bass replay. This is not at all mandatory or a requirement. I don’t play that “synergy” game. Both warm and cooler sources sound fine. However, offsetting the bass emphasis does seem to help with something a hint less warm. I have to be careful though because I know I’ll get one of you writing to me asking why I didn’t specify about pairings. I am doing so now. Sometimes it helps to actually read what I write. Lol. So again, it isn’t a set which definitely NEEDS a source either cooler or warmer and I wouldn’t take much. Please remember that we reviewers speak subjectively. Please remember this. For example, reviewers will tell you that “such-and-such” set “needs” something warm, or something neutral. Don’t buy in folks. You don’t have their ears, and you don’t have their taste either. We can try to help veer you in one direction or the other, but these tonality pairings are in no way set in stone. To finish this thought, I really feel the PRX does perfectly fine with most source tonalities but really warm, or really bright sources seem to do the worst in my humble opinion. 

What do you need? 

I just think you need something with a hair more power. Again, about 100mw @32 ohms should get you there. Almost all dongle dacs above $45 will easily give you that. Not many are produced with less than that nowadays. Most will give you almost double to three times that amount. So, do some due diligence and try to find something with adequate power for a planar. Having said that, planars like the PRX always want more and the improvements can be heard as you add more output. I hope that helps. 

Sound Impressions 

Note: really quick, I did complete a four-day burn-in period for the PRX, and I do feel that it helped the PRX quite well. This is usually the case with planar drivers from my experience. Also, I listen only with flac or better files stored on my devices. When listening I primarily use UAPP music app though at times (for a couple devices) I use Hiby Music app and Poweramp. 

The KZ PRX is certainly the culmination of all of KZ’s experience with the driver tech. Or a culmination of all of the public’s thoughts on their earlier sets. Prior to the PRX each of their planars were tuned well enough. However, they most definitely increased the treble quite a lot resulting in some people not enjoying those sets as much. Still very good iems technically, and nice sets once you pick your source and eartips. In comes the PRX…

What’s it sound like?

Now, the PRX is a different animal. Previously I would have told you that the X-HBB PR2 was their best planar to date. Despite that, I think the PRX can officially take the title belt on this one. I find the PRX to be warm/neutral yet leaning more warm than neutral. I hear a nicely smooth sound in comparison to past planars from the brand and still ample crispness at times as well. Once again, we have a highly technical iem in the PRX though with the toned-down treble those technical aspects are less illuminated. You could say this is KZ’s most musical sounding planar iem without calling it “musical” per se. Just more-so than previous sets. Honestly, I’ll just get it out of the way now, the KZ PRX is most definitely KZ/CCA’s best planar yet. My opinion of course. I feel the timbre is the closest they’ve come to organic though there is some planar timbre happening here and there. Still, it’s the best they’ve come to a natural sound. The stage isn’t the widest, but there is some depth to the sound which helps to give the PRX a slightly more euphonic presentation. There’s some roundness to notes whereas prior sets were flatter. Now I’m not saying this set is world changing but so far, I’m liking what I’m hearing. There are some subjective gripes that some will have. That goes without saying. I will try to break those gripes down as best I can. 

Condensed Sound Between the 20’s 

I make this section of the review to give the reader a short and condensed synopsis of my findings. Usually, I just highlight some of the better qualities of the set here. I will do a deep dive into each 3rd of the mix later in the review. 

To begin, the bass has some real meat to it. KZ decided to give the PRX some real rumble. The bass isn’t lifted too far above some of their other sets, like the PR3. However, the reduction of the treble certainly pronounces the bass more. The bass is quick, meaty, has some slam and can take on very fast bass tracks. Looking at the midrange, it isn’t as recessed as some of their other planars. The mids are actually well presented here. There is some weight to the lower mids. Not quite rich/lush but certainly lean-lush with good density. They’re on the warmer side, but as you make your way to the upper-mids you’ll notice the energy and levity rising. There is some shimmer up there however I also here some slight planar edgy timbre as well. This is very hard to get around so do keep that in mind. The treble is really where KZ stepped up their game in my eyes. No longer do we have screaming treble activity, and no longer is there any shrillness. Just brilliant enough with very nice detail retrieval and good extension into the upper treble. Detail retrieval is certainly above average, separation is pretty good too and imaging is also better than your average $50 iem. All in all, not bad at all. Again, there are some subjective qualms but for the most part KZ did a nice work on this set. 

Bass Region 

The bass carries some weight to it. I hear a fun rumble in the PRX which carries better density and note mass than I’m used to hearing in KZ planar sets. Without question this is sub-bass focused with a good 12 dB sub-bass shelf and a very long and steady glide down through the mid-bass. Similar to previous sets. However, like I said those previous variations of planars also had quite a bit more treble activity which brought a much brighter hue to the sound altogether. The bass is more apparent on this set, more robust, more vibratory and physical. Having said that, it’s also not intrusive, at all. Well, maybe on some more bass heavy jams you’ll get some masking. Still, the bass doesn’t warm the rest of the mix to a fault. It isn’t to a detriment. In fact, the midrange is actually pretty darn clean with just a smidgen of bleed. Honestly, I like this a lot. I like a little bleed from the bass. At any rate, this is definitely not a basshead worthy set. Not for the bass-bois. Yet this is a set for those who like a fun and mature sounding planar bass. Beyond all of that, the low-end has good note definition. You’ll see quickly that the PRX low-end is not one-noted and does have distinct and clean notes. It’s really a nice frequency on this set. 

Sub-bass 

Like I said, the sub-bass is certainly the focal point of the PRX’s bass region. What you have is a deep hitting sub-bass which does have pretty darn good haptic vibrational feedback. Basically, it’s a physical bass more than anything. I hear very good note definition too as transients attack and decay rather quickly. You don’t have a ton of lingering harmonics or resonances. It’s more like; attack and done, or… attack, quick decay and quick release. However, inside of that quick note response is a concrete style density which makes its presence felt. For the most part. I don’t want the wrong image to get across here though as I don’t feel that the PRX sub-bass is too far emphasized which may make the mid-bass muddy and bloated. I still hear a streamline and clean version of a boosted sub-bass. Listening to “Sharp Diamonds” by Michael Nau I get a hefty bass guitar drone with nicely separated instruments. The sub-bass most certainly has that palpable feel to the sound which in my mind serves as the foundation of this track. I feel the sub-bass is very well done, especially if you enjoy that tactile and textured presentation with nice physicality. 

Mid-bass 

Now the mid-bass is less lifted and in fact quite clean. KZ made sure not to lift the mid-bass too much or extend too far into the midrange by keeping a consistent and long glide down the bass shelf. One thing is for sure, the mid-bass isn’t going to be muddy, or laggy, and won’t come across slow. To me this is great. I feel that KZ added in just enough textured slam to the mix to represent different genres. Enough to make for full bass guitars, bass drops come through with good tactility as well. Now, I could use a hint more impact for kick drums but that is largely dependent on what track I’m listening to. Usually, I feel that the mid-bass is actually quite punchy, and the sub-bass really does serve to add some texture to the sound and to mid-bass notes. I hear enough groove to the sound, enough strength to each note, enough corporeal and tangible surface viscosity of each note. This is what good planar bass can get you. I’m sure that some would like more emphasis but I’m quite happy with what KZ added here. Just enough. Tracks like “Don’t Touch That Dial” by Django Django shows off the texture, speed and recovery as well as the ability for the PRX to separate each note cleanly while still having a full bass boom along with clean separation between other instruments. So, it isn’t the biggest mid-bass I’ve ever heard, but it is very good for $55.

Downsides to the Bass Region 

There will always be those who simply don’t want an emphasized bass. It’s just the nature of the hobby. There will be those who are simply allergic to a bass which takes the focus of a song. I gotta say though, I think that KZ did a nice job of balancing the sound and taking some of the focal point away from the low-end. Also, there are plenty of my friends who greatly desire a slow and organic bass with plenty of lingering harmonics and resonances. Beyond that, some folks may want even more of a heavy-handed bass region. Bass heads will likely not be impressed at the low-end here. They want that pregnant mid-bass full of convexity and bulbous fullness. I get it too. You cannot please everyone though. Some may want even more punch on kick drums. More of a hollow boom with even more texture in the initial strike. Having said that, I really enjoy what KZ did here. I like that they brought the treble down to earth just enough to hear and feel the low-end emphasis. To feel the best of the drum, the groove to the bass guitar and the punch that we live so much. I really don’t have much to complain about here. 

Midrange

This brings us to the midrange. The PRX carries a mostly neutral tonal coloration across the midrange with hints of warmth carried over from the bass region, along with pretty nice note weight. The note body is generally lean-lush, semi-rich, quick yet dense. Definitely not flat-out “rich” or overtly weighted. Now, the PRX mids are not as recessed as I would’ve guessed. It sure doesn’t sound overly recessed or pushed further back into the sound field. There’s some presence there, some vibrance, some depth to the sound along with a more forward feel to my music with the PRX in my ears. Like I said earlier, this isn’t like some other planars which almost have a wall of sound in front of me. I do hear some roundness to notes too. I like the tonality and timbre for what the PRX is. However, there is some metallic planar timbre throughout the mids. I honestly don’t pay attention to it, but it is there in a slight way. I felt that was worth mentioning. Other than that, the timbre leans more natural than anything else. 

Midrange cont… 

Also, the midrange is not dull on the PRX as macro-dynamics are fairly bustling and spirited. The extra energy up top certainly lends itself to a more vivid and bouncy presentation which boosts macro-dynamics. Only to an extent though. You see, underlying that energy, or that peppiness is a nicely controlled and nicely bodied sound with the slightest of warmth sprinkled in. Basically, it isn’t all vibrance and sparkles. There’s a balance that is nice to hear. That said, the PRX does exhibit some good hard-edged crispness, good instrument separation and can illuminate the subtleties (details) rather easily as well. I’ll be honest, for a $53 planar set it is hard to find any straight “cons”. Really the most egregious issue is the tinge of planar timbre. In my opinion anyways. 

Lower-midrange 

The lower midrange on the KZ PRX certainly has a feathering of spillover from the bass region. I would still classify the low-mids as slightly lean, but also solid. Like I said, there is a roundness to notes, some dimension to each note. I would think that the transient quick note attack through recovery helps to lean out those notes a bit while at the same time the slight warmth adds some weight, or mass. What I’m getting at is male vocals sound pretty nice. I usually want at least a bit of warmth here as I like men to sound like men. I like some authority in their voices. Really, the PRX does make vocals nicely. Whether it’s Sam Tompkins in “Numb” or The Red Clay Strays in “I’m Still Fine”, the PRX takes two distinctly different male voices and puts them both on a pedestal in front of me. Im not saying that the PRX is some vocal centric set created to exude vocal superiority over the under $60 crowd. What I am saying is that KZ did a nice job with the emphasis in this region. Ya there’s some metallic note ends but the actual cadence and inflections to voices is really nice. Couple those attributes with a more vanward, anterior presence to their vocals (which are most certainly not relegated to the background) and what you have are good male vocals for the driver type and for the price. Details in this region are good, nothing stuffy, veiled or muddy and separation is also very good. 

Upper-Midrange 

The upper midrange is where you usually get most females but of course this isn’t always true. When I say upper-mids, what I mean is mid-mids to lower treble. Or mid-mids thought the pinna gain. No doubt there are also male voices within this range too. However, a lot of instruments find their home here as well. There’s just a lot of info within this region. The PRX does a very good job of dissecting different instruments and then placing them on the stage. The upper-mids are definitely more forward than the low-mids and there is also more of a sparkle in this region. Note weight is a hair thinner, less robust and you will hear some very slight planar timbre here too. Again, I overlook it easily. It doesn’t bother me. Will it bother you? Anyways, strings have some very nice edge to them. Every last finger slide is heard. Percussion has that energetic snap to it, some crunch, and the fundamental tone of a cymbal strike comes through realistic in tone. Violin generally has that silvery sound to it and that melodic abrasiveness as well. I could go on and on about instruments, but every track can replay them different and so speaking in gross generalities seems to work best for me. 

Upper-Midrange cont… 

Once again female voices are forward with a tempered and controlled shimmer to them. This is one thing that KZ did in that they reduced the pinna rise a bit from earlier sets while also reducing certain areas of the treble region. What they effectively did was give females just enough sparkle. Nothing shouty, nothing glaring, and nothing too sibilant either. Notes in this region have control. I would still say that they lean more analytical than anything, but females still come through nicely. Each note is slightly more rigid, less smooth, but also very clean and well separated with easy to distinguish details. I do hear a hint of planar timbre, but presence and vibrance is great and overall, I’d say that females are pleasant sounding. Voices like Olivia Rodrigo in the track “Enough For You” sounds really great with the PRX. She sings with her head voice for much of this track. What I like about the PRX is that her voice comes across soft enough, feathered enough and yet still each note has very good definition. Very good! The strumming guitar has very good pitch and tone as I can hear each string pulled. It sounds authentic. Another track is Lady Gaga in “Always Remember Us This Way”. Now, her voice is raspier which catches that planar timbre edge a bit, but I feel her voice comes across pretty naturally and very mellifluously. Maybe a hair thinner than perfectly natural but who says perfectly natural is the best way to listen to music. Again, not saying the PRX is some vocal dream of a set but for what it is, it’s better than I would’ve thought. 

Downsides to the Midrange 

I think the biggest downside to the KZ PRX’s midrange would have to be the planar timbre which shows up. Like I said, this set does have some metallic sounding note edges at times. For the price this should be expected though. That said, do we buy planars for their perfect rendition of a natural sound? No, we buy them for their speed, their details, their textures, and for their ability to replay even complicated tracks without getting tripped up. Some planars buck this trend but most have at least a slight planar timbre edge. I should add that this will likely lessen as time goes on during usage, so keep that in mind. Anyways, another thing that may be a subjective gripe is those who want rich, thick, weighted notes in their midrange. Warm lovers, or lush lovers will probably not enjoy the more analytical nature of the PRX’s mids. Many people want musicality first iems and there certainly are planars which do just that. Sets like the Kiwi Ears Melody, or Letshuoer S08. So, folks who want the more melodic sounding midrange may want to keep looking. Beyond that, I don’t hear any huge amount of sibilance, and I don’t hear any real shoutiness from any pinna rise. The mids have good energy and are very detailed, with good cleanliness and separation. Not bad at all. A couple issues but great for the price and for anyone who want to try out a planar for the first time. 

Treble Region 

The highs on the KZ PRX are definitely less noticeably boosted than previous versions. However, don’t let those words confuse you because the PRX still has some sheen of treble brightness which makes its way into my ears. KZ added enough treble emphasis to bring levity to the entire mix and counter the bass in such a way that brings a good dynamic balance to the sound. Well, almost a balance. Let’s put it this way, the PRX isn’t so boosted that the treble takes the focus. Where the treble used to be a focal point or the leading role, it is now simply a supporting actor. We are used to hearing heavily boosted treble which came across as forced resolution to a degree. With the PRX it is enough of a lift to supply the midrange with some snap, and even some crunch, some crispness, and it’s enough to add air to the sound and some openness. Nothing congested with the playback on the PRX. Just not as lifted as prior models and I’m okay with that. 

Crunch/crispness 

Instruments in this region basically come across pretty crisp to my ears. Some sources will veer one way or the other a hair but generally there is a prevailing crispness and crunch to most notes in the treble. I could use a bit more body at times and some treble punch but I’m also speaking on a $53 iem. With that crispness is some decently round notes too. Definitely enough to image and separate well enough and to bring details to the surface. Micro-dynamics, details, and macro sense details are all well displayed too. However, with all of this crispness also comes the planar timbre too. So, it’s a give and take. Very nice though for the tuning KZ was going for. I really don’t want to oversell or undersell here as the PRX certainly has its own flavor. Not the best treble I’ve ever heard, but it is clean, like the rest of the mix. Also, the treble is somewhat refined in the sense that not a lot gets past this set and most subtleties are easy to hear. I suppose I would usually want more body and more smoothness overall, but I have to be reasonable. Furthermore, I know plenty of folks who will love what they get from this set and on the flipside, I know plenty who will think the treble is simply not to their liking. At any rate, note definition, roundness, separation, details, and texture can be heard pretty well. 

Really good for $53

A few other aspects of the PRX treble which are solid attributes is the extension into the upper treble past 8-10k. I hear plenty of info out in the upper regions of the mix. Also, the ability to take on complicated tracks without breaking a sweat. So, the extension can be heard very easily with the secondary harmonics of a cymbal strike. Tracks like “In Bloom” by Nirvana have some easy to pick out cymbals and the PRX does a nice job of representing the lingering decay of those cymbals. Okay, there is some slight splash there but nothing that would come across my mind as a “con”. This is a planar and so looking for perfectly organic sound is like expecting orange juice from a cow. It’s typically not always going to happen. However, it’s also not entirely unnatural either and actually nice for the price. Also, the PRX handles quick and repetitive treble activity very easily without sounding like a mess of treble sheen. Songs like “Magnetic Fields, Pt. 1” by Jean Michel Jarre perfectly shows this off. There are some very rapid-fire treble beats littered all through this track and the PRX is able to carve a note outline around each one. In a very clinical way and articulate way. Again, is it the most natural? Probably not. Is it really good for $53? Yep. 

Downsides to the Treble Region 

For starters, anyone who desires a dark treble or a warmer treble will not be happy with this set unless they entirely rearrange their listening preferences. The treble is most certainly boosted. Granted they are way more controlled and less bright than earlier KZ planars, but there is certainly some brilliance there. Those who really enjoy a smoother treble are also not going to enjoy the ever-so-slightly jagged edges, knife edges, and crispness that the PRX can have at times. Having said that, I really don’t find the PRX bad at all in this regard. I happen to like the textures it provides. There is some splash up top too but nothing that is so blatant that it’s hard to ignore. Really not a bad job at all. 

Technicalities 

Soundstage 

The soundstage on the PRX is about average in size I’d say but has above average depth for a planar. Width is roughly average, same with height and there is some depth within the sound field. Having some depth does make a difference in your listening as it adds an extra dimension then would otherwise be there. We are used to planars being a 2D flat plane of sound in front of us, but the PRX has some front to back layers. Granted, it isn’t some deep expanse of sound but for a $53 planar the depth is nice. There is some layering there which is nice to hear. 

Separation / Imaging 

I think that instrument separation is actually quite good. I mean, the sound is not super rich and thick, it has good note definition across the board along with an across-the-board transient behavior which is perceivably pretty quick and tight. KZ also made sure to add some lift up top which comes across as openness and air. The sound is simply well separated as fairly distinguished note lines separate elements of the stage. I never really hear anything ultra congested either. I’m sure I could find a track to make a liar out of myself but for the most part the PRX handles speedier tracks nicely. Imaging is the same, so long as you aren’t listening to a heavy bass track. The low-end can impede on your ability to hear different sounds and image them as separate and distinct at times. Other than that imaging is also good. 

Detail Retrieval 

As I’ve said this whole review, detail retrieval is very nice. If that’s what you are into. The sound of this set is mostly an analytical affair with a more clinical approach and so details are fairly easy to come by. I wouldn’t call them class leading but they are very good. I feel that KZ has some of their own planars which have better detail retrieval in fact. That’s what I like about this set; it isn’t devoid of musicality while still keeping tight to the technical foundation. So, detail retrieval is pretty good. Certainly, much better than your average $50 iem. 

Comparisons 

KZ X-HBB PR2  ($45)

The KZ X-HBB PR2 was the first planar from KZ that I truly enjoyed, a lot (PR2 Review). It has been said that there as re different iterations of that set, but I don’t know how true that is. Anyways, the PR2 is another planar set from KZ which took on a boatload of acclaim, praise, and scandal. Without question it was on everyone’s lips who cared about the subject. The PR2 is actually a collaboration effort between YouTube personality Bad Guy Good Audio Reviews (HBB) and KZ in attempt to put HBB’s spin on KZ’s tuning. Anyways, it’s a nice set folks and one that was tuned right for what it is. 

Differences 

So, the build quality is very similar between the two sets. Both are made of the same basic mold and share the exact shape. Both ergonomic and well-fitting in most ears. I do think the new PRX is the better-looking set but that is a matter of judgment. Now, the newer PRX also has the updated planar driver which is something to consider I suppose. Honestly, there simply isn’t much that has changed between variations aesthetically and we know that the packaging is identical. That certainly doesn’t change. At any rate, I think the differences are all in where it counts… in the sound. 

Sound Differences 

First off, the PRX has deeper and more substantial bass that has better density than the PR2. On top of that, I feel the PRX actually has better bass definition too. The PR2 can be somewhat soft at the edges at times whereas the PRX doesn’t have that as much. Also, the midrange of the PRX has better note weight, and has a more forward approach. Less V-shaped but more melodic. The PR2 is even more analytical and has thinner note body and more flat presentation. Upper-mids of the PR2 are shoutier, induce glare easier, and even have a touch more sibilance. The treble is less energized on the PRX which helps to have a better balance than the PR2 has. Perhaps the PR2 is more detailed, and even better separated but I feel this is a good thing. I like that KZ tuned the PRX to not have so much forced resolution. Again, details are good on but the PR2 is tuned to bring more to the surface. However, I find the PRX does better with imaging by a slight margin, a deeper stage and simply a more euphonic listen altogether. 

Final thoughts on this comparison 

Folks, the differences between these two sets are like hearing KZ’s experience grow in real time. With each iteration they got better, and the proof is right inf front of me. Many say the PR2 is the best planar they’ve ever made but I beg to differ. I think the PRX takes that crown folks. It’s a good one. Now, if you enjoy a bright, brilliant display and can handle the lift up top than maybe the PR2 is for you. Any other listening style would probably reach for the PRX first. 

KZ PR3  ($62) 

Next, we have the KZ PR3 (PR3 Review) which was KZ’s latest and greatest planar set. The PR3 is usually price around $40 to $50 (on sale for $23 right now @ Ali) and is another set that got a huge amount of fanfare. It got a ton of thoughts, both good and bad. Some love the PR3, and some detest it. So, nothing out of the ordinary. However, the tuning was a hint polarizing. I happen to think it’s a very good 1st planar magnetic iem but the PR3 serves a more particular taste. The PR3 has a relatively new 13.2 mm planar magnetic driver and a lot in common with this latest PRX, let’s take a look. 

Differences

Well, there really aren’t many differences to note here. At least aesthetically and in terms of build, comfort, packaging. It’s basically the identical set in that regard. I suppose one may have a preference in the actual design department. I personally like both sets designs quite a lot. Always liked this metal industrial modern design that both sets have. Maybe if you twisted my arm, I’d say the newer PRX is a slightly better designed set, but they are both nice to look at. Both have the exact build, exact everything almost. Same exact packaging too. So not many differences other than the PRX has an “upgraded” driver. 

Sound Differences 

Once again, the differences are very similar to those I posed in the PR2 comparison, to an extent. I would first say that the PR3 has even less of a low-end emphasis than the PR2. So, the PRX has a lot more of a dense and authoritative rumble and slam. Bass is more of a focal point of the PRX whereas the PR3 I’d say the treble is the focal point. This who enjoy bass will enjoy the PRX more and treble heads would probably really dig the PR3. I notice that timbre is much more authentic to life on the PRX, more organic, natural and simply less artificial sounding. The midrange of the PRX is more forward, lusher, and it has a smoother side to it than the crispy, crunchy and analytical sound of the PR3. That said, the PR3 has better detail retrieval, is more open sounding, and definitely airier. In fact, the PR3 is better across the board technically. However, the PRX is much easier to listen to for long periods, timbre is much better and also, the PRX is still very good technically. You could say the PRX is the more musical sounding iem of the two as well. Obviously treble brilliance, emphasis, technical ability, and extension goes to the PR3. It is the PR3’s bread and butter after all. So, these are two very different sounding iems. Both nice for what they are and the hobbyist with whom they serve. 

Final thoughts on this comparison 

Again, these are two entirely different sounding earphones. Both serve a different listener style. One is warmer, more fun, bassier, more musically gifted, while the other is clinical, dry, analytical, and ridiculously fast with a largely emphasized treble region. They serve different listening preferences. Not saying one is better than the other, but I can say that one suits me more. That being the brand new PRX. 

Is it worth the asking price? 

This is a tough one. I gotta say, the PRX is a nicely done set for the price. I can’t think there would be any good reason to conclude that the PRX isn’t worth the low cost of $53. Having said that I do know that many folks would obviously not be thrilled over this set. With so many iems resting at that $50 price point there is simply a lot to choose from. I feel the PRX is really worth this price if you are someone who really wants to try a planar driver earphone for the first time. Beyond that, I’m sure there are some huge KZ supporters who can’t miss a release. Or simply someone who wants good planar bass and a less shouty sound. I think in general the PRX is worth every penny. Despite that, for me and my situation, I don’t feel I’d want to pay the $53 because I already have about 15 planar sets. I simply don’t need them. Now, if I didn’t have any planars and only had $60 to spend then without question I’d pick this set up. Still to answer this question I feel it is pretty cut n’ dry; the PRX is worth every penny of that $53.

The Why… 

Because look at the build of this set, all 3D printed resin with a dope looking faceplate. It’s just a nice-looking set friends. Yes, we’ve seen these builds before but that doesn’t take away from what KZ has crafted here. Truly a cool looking design that will look dope in any ear. Next, this is a planar magnetic earphone folks. Not just any ole’ planar, but an “actual” planar. Say what you will about KZ but at least they are crafting actual planar earphones with actual planar drivers. Yet always it will be the sound that drives us. After all it is always about music in the end. It’s the sound here. The deep and hearty bass. Quick, tight, dense and with great feel to it. The midrange is forward enough with good energy and fantastic details. Lastly the treble comes through with just enough brilliance and good extension. Again, details are very good across the frequency with very good imaging for the price. In my opinion the PRX is a fantastic choice for anyone wanting to purchase a planar for the first time. 

Ratings  (0-10)

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the KZ PRX ratings below, that would be $35-$65 planar magnetic iems. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $35-$65 US planar iems are a smaller sized scope of iems. So, It shouldn’t be a crazy surprise to see a rating above a “9.0”. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me. 

Aesthetic 

–Build Quality:     9.3   Built very well.         

–Look:                      9.7   Dope industrial design. 

–Fit/Comfort:        9.5   Fit and comfort is great for me. 

–Accessories:          – –    Accessories don’t matter at this price. 

–Overall:                 9.5🔥🔥                                 

Sound Rating     

–Timbre:                  9.5    Very nice timbre for a budget planar.    

–Bass:                        9.6   Big, extended, deep, it slams. 

–Midrange:              9.3   Detailed, clean, great presence.   

–Treble:                     8.9   Crisp, extended, speedy. 

–Technicalities:      8.8    Technically very nice.    

–Musicality:             8.5    Still pretty musical.                                                     

–Overall:                     9.1🔥🔥🔥

Ratings Summary:

To summarize the ratings above I’d first state that there isn’t a huge number of planar magnetic earphones between $35 and $65. In fact, most of them are created by KZ themselves, which isn’t surprising. There are a few which are fantastic though. I know the Artti T10 can be found that low and I can tell you right now, it’s a higher rated set. More expensive but tuned very well. However, it also hovers closer to $69 to $75. So that’s a $20 difference and anyone hunting in the budget ranges usually can’t go too much higher than their target amount. This is how I figure out ranges by the way. I Want these ridiculous ratings to make at least some sense. I cannot stand simple blanket ratings which involve every iem from $10 to $5k. They don’t make sense, they help nobody (probably hurts more than anything), and they change every six months at the least. I try to zero mine in as much as possible but even my ratings won’t make any sense a year from now. Ratings are simply a horrible way to decide any purchase. Please do you and me a favor… and just skip this section. Disregard the ratings please. They’ll change with the next KZ planar set anyways. 

Explain Yourself! 

Okay, there’s a lot to explain here but I don’t think there’s anything I’d change. I stand by every rating above. Ya know I have just about every planar in the range I listed, and I sat testing them all out in every category. I really think I got this one close to right. Of course there will be detractors though, because that’s what they do. They message me in annoyed anger over my ratings, that I don’t even want you guys reading… Lol. Weird I know. Okay, so like I said, I have them all and the PRX is easily one of the best money can buy for a planar set up to $65. There really aren’t many actual planars in this range. I feel the bass is the best bass for any planar in this range, or at least it’s within the top sets of its class. The bass is great. I wouldn’t change that score. Even the midrange is an awesome rendition of a planar mid-section. It’s two parts analytical & one part musical with great technicals and energy. I wouldn’t change that score except maybe go higher with it. Timbre could get arguments, but I’d beg you to find me better timbre for a planar in that range. Some are close, some tie, but none are flat-out better. The only thing which holds back the timbre is the slight planar metallic edge to notes. That’s it. Folks, in my opinion a “9.1” is a low score for this set in overall sound ratings. It should be higher. It’s a nice planar set.

Final comments 

To finalize my thoughts, I feel the KZ PRX is in a good position to become that one planar set that most budget hobbyists will desire. Well, as far as under $65 is concerned. There’s a handful of planars within the PRX’s price point and each of them are pretty underwhelming, or they’re too overwhelming in my opinion. I can tell you that a planar around this price is going to have some subtle issues about them. You’ll always have the timbre issue in that there is that electric fuzz which follows the crest of some notes. Also, usually planars want and desire a bit more power to drive them in a satisfying way. However, there are also some major benefits to a planar set. Those include detail retrieval, transient swiftness, cleanliness, instrument separation, texture of notes and the list goes on. In my opinion it’s worth it to at least try a planar so that you can hear the difference. So, there are some things to consider before you purchase a planar for the first time. Having said that, the PRX is a very well done iem for such a low cost and I cannot complete this review without recommending them to anyone who wants a low-cost planar set. 

Conclusion 

To conclude my full written review and feature of the KZ PRX, I first have to thank the people of KZ as well as Tyvan Lam for providing the PRX. I’ve said it countless times in reviews that KZ is always good to cover because they really ask nothing of me at all. Never do they ask to pre-read any reviews, never ask me to skew my words or cover their products in a positive light. Never. They simply send the product and live with the result. I can respect this. Oh, and trust me, not every brand is like this. Coincidentally, I don’t cover those brands anymore who do ask for those things. Integrity matters folks. Anyways, thank you KZ. Also, thank you for reading this review and taking the time out of your busy schedule. It truly means the world to myself and my partners over at Mobileaudiophile.com. Thank you! Also, I hope more than anything that this review and any review you read at our website is in some way helpful to you. That is our greatest hope. 

Different perspectives 

Remember that we are all different folks. Each one of us can hear our music a little bit differently than the next guy. Not all of us have been down similar roads through audio, we may not all have similar musical tastes or libraries. We may have different likes and dislikes and who knows, we may not even hear the same. So many variables. Please, I am asking you to watch, read, or listen to other reviews of the KZ PRX. I’m telling you it will help you to make a more educated decision. Also, there are so many great reviewers out there with fantastic perspectives. It’s worth it to check em’ out. Beyond that, I think I’m done friends. I hope you enjoyed this review, and I hope each and every single last one of you are well and good. Please take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!