Like this site? Help us to make it better.

AfterShokz Aeropex bone conduction headphones



Comfortable to wear with decent sound clarity and good battery life
Decent sound without masking environmental noise
Comfortable to wear
Good battery life
Muddy standard EQ, especially using earplugs
Headband doesn't play nice with some helmets
Proprietary lead means you need to take care not to lose it
Wind noise a problem on the bike

At every product is thoroughly tested for as long as it takes to get a proper insight into how well it works. Our reviewers are experienced cyclists that we trust to be objective. While we strive to ensure that opinions expressed are backed up by facts, reviews are by their nature an informed opinion, not a definitive verdict. We don't intentionally try to break anything (except locks) but we do try to look for weak points in any design. The overall score is not just an average of the other scores: it reflects both a product's function and value – with value determined by how a product compares with items of similar spec, quality, and price.

What the scores mean

Good scores are more common than bad, because fortunately good products are more common than bad.

  • Exceptional
  • Excellent
  • Very Good
  • Good
  • Quite good
  • Average
  • Not so good
  • Poor
  • Bad
  • Appalling

The AfterShokz Aeropex wireless bone-conduction headphones are a good choice if you want to listen to music while also paying attention to other stuff that's going on. The reproduction quality isn't as good as even a cheap set of in-ear buds but it's generally good enough, and the Aeropex headset is comfy to wear and fully waterproofed. If you like to listen to music on your rides and still hear what's going on, they're a good option.

Bone conduction you say? If you're not familiar with the concept it's fairly simple: instead of feeding sound waves through the air into your ear, a bone-conduction headphone sits just in front of you ear, and a moving diaphragm vibrates directly onto your skin. The vibrations work their way through the bone structure of your skull and they're picked up by your inner ear, which translates them into sound.

> Find your nearest dealer here

That means your ear is empty, so you can also hear environmental sounds, like your mate shouting that they've punctured, or an Audi revving six inches from your rear wheel. It also means that you can still hear someone coughing two rows back on the plane, or the din of your lawn mower, so AfterShokz includes earplugs for the times you don't want to hear anything else but what you're streaming.

AfterShokz Aeropex wireless bone conduction headphones - worn 4.jpg

In the box you get the headphones, two charging cables and those earplugs, all in a nice silicone case with a magnetic clasp. Two cables? Well, the Aeropex headphones are the first AfterShokz headphones to move to a fully waterproof construction. You can do that with a standard micro-USB charging post but the tiny terminals and their close proximity mean that any moisture in there when you're charging can eat away at the connections by galvanic action and they don't tend to last that long.

Instead, AfterShokz has opted for a magnetic charging port and a proprietary cable. You get two, so that means you can charge at home and at work; or, more likely, put one safe for when you inevitably lose one.

AfterShokz Aeropex wireless bone conduction headphones - charger port and buttons.jpg

It's swings and roundabouts: the proprietary connector is the price you pay for proper waterproofing. They're not recommended for lap swimming, but a long ride in the rain should be well within their limits.

The headphones use the Bluetooth 5.0 protocol and claim connectivity up to 10m. They were simple to pair to everything I tried to pair them to (phone, laptop, PC) with no dropout issues even when I was walking through the house to make a coffee. The connection seems really stable, and there's a built-in microphone if you like to take important business calls when you're out on your bike. It works well.

> The locked down cyclist’s guide to getting fit and staying fit from the comfort of home

This is not the first pair of AfterShokz bone-conduction headphones, nor the first we've tested. It's the new range topper, though, and pricey at £149.95. So what's changed? Well, the sound is better, says AfterShokz. 'Re-engineered technology delivers the widest dynamic stereo sound that bone conduction can offer,' it says. 'Say hello to deeper bass, less vibration and louder volume.'

If there are gains there, they're reasonably marginal. I also have a pair of the AfterShokz Trekz Titanium headphones to hand which we tested back in 2016 and are available for half what the new Aeropex headphones cost. And there's not a great deal of difference in the overall volume or the sound clarity, though the new headphones are slightly better.

Bass and volume

Bone-conduction headphones struggle with two specific things. Firstly, they find it hard to transmit bass frequencies. The Aeropex headphones are a bit better here than their predecessors, although I'd suggest it's more of an EQ tweak than necessarily that there is more bass available. Out of the box they sound bassier, but with earplugs in they're also a bit muddier overall with lots of mid and not enough high frequencies.

I've generally found that I need a headphone EQ app on my smartphone to get the best out of bone-conduction headphones, and for both open ears and earplugs the EQ is cutting the mid frequencies quite a bit. With earplugs in I need high frequencies ramped up basically as far as they go to get a balanced sound. With a bit of fiddling, though, it's pretty good.

> Buyer’s Guide: 13 of the best indoor cycling apps

The other issue is volume. The maximum volume you can hear is dependent on how much vibration the headphones can send into your skull, which is limited in the most part by how tightly they're held there. The narrow headband on the Aeropex headphones has a similar spring tension to the Trekz Titanium headphones, and the overall volume is comparable. If you turn them up too loud then they bounce off your skin which is tickly and affects the sound quality.

AfterShokz Aeropex wireless bone conduction headphones - worn 2.jpg

They're loud enough to hear out on the open road, and still have ear-room for approaching traffic or other cues. With your ears open you get plenty of wind noise when you're travelling fast, like you normally would on a bike. The headphones are ideally placed to stop that: all you'd need is a small wind baffle stuck on top to disrupt the air over your ear. Something like the ones designed to stick over a camera's internal mic would probably do the trick, although I haven't tried yet.

The tension band sticks out a bit from the back of your head, which it does with all the bone-conduction headphones I've tried. This can be an issue with some helmets: sometimes it's where the retention system sits, and urban helmets with a low rear can foul the band too.

AfterShokz Aeropex wireless bone conduction headphones - worn 1.jpg

If you get a chance it's worth trying out the headphones with your usual riding gear to see if you're going to run into any problems.

Lighter and longer lasting

Two things have drastically improved over the older, cheaper Trekz Titanium headphones. The first is comfort: these Aeropex headphones are just miles more comfortable than any other bone-conduction headphones I've tried. They're lighter and smaller, and they have a full silicone outer that's kind against the skin. I haven't reached a point where they've become uncomfortable.

AfterShokz Aeropex wireless bone conduction headphones - worn 3.jpg

Secondly, the battery life has improved even though they're smaller. AfterShokz claims a battery life of eight hours for the Aeropex heaphones, and although I haven't quite got that I have managed over seven, which is really good considering their size.


Overall, these headphones are better than the Trekz Titanium ones I've been directly comparing them to because they're to hand, and they're also better than the Trekz Air headphones that we've also reviewed and were launched at the same price, although they're widely available for under £100 now.

If you want to listen to music and also hear what's going on around you then bone conduction is the way to go and these are the best ones I've tried so far. At £150 they're expensive. Are they five times as good as a no-brand £30 set from Amazon? Probably not, although we have just ordered a pair to find out. But like the others we've tested before them, they're a good investment if they fit your needs.


Comfortable to wear with decent sound clarity and good battery life test report

Make and model: AfterShokz Aeropex bone conduction headphones

Size tested: One size

Tell us what the product is for and who it's aimed at. What do the manufacturers say about it? How does that compare to your own feelings about it?

From AfterShokz:


With nothing inside or over your ears, patented bone conduction technology allows for total awareness and comfort while you listen.


Re-engineered technology delivers the widest dynamic stereo sound that bone conduction can offer. Say hello to deeper bass, less vibration and louder volume.


Adventure awaits - don't get held back by your headphones. With 8 hours of battery life, enjoy music, calls, audiobooks, and podcasts all day long.


IP67 rating makes these fully sweat and waterproof to welcome intense workouts and extreme weather. *Not recommended for lap swimming*

Rate the product for quality of construction:

Very nicely made and presented.

Rate the product for performance:

Good overall. Still issues with bass response, volume and wind noise.

Rate the product for durability:

No issues in testing, hard to comment on long-term but other AfterShokz units I've tested have lasted well.

Rate the product for weight (if applicable)

Really light.

Rate the product for comfort (if applicable)

The comfiest bone-conduction headphones I've used yet.

Rate the product for value:

Expensive but good quality.

Tell us how the product performed overall when used for its designed purpose


Tell us what you particularly liked about the product

Comfortable, good battery life, strong connection, waterproof.

Tell us what you particularly disliked about the product

Sound a bit muddy out of the box, still issues with bass reponse and volume, wind noise on the bike.

How does the price compare to that of similar products in the market, including ones recently tested on

Wireless bone-conduction headphones start at about £30 on Amazon. This is the top of the AfterShokz range, and it's the market leader.

Did you enjoy using the product? Yes, mostly.

Would you consider buying the product? Maybe...

Would you recommend the product to a friend? Yes, if it suited their needs.

Use this box to explain your overall score

Like the other bone-conduction headphones we've tried they're a good solution to a specific issue when riding – listening to music and hearing other stuff – that works, but not without compromise. They're pricey but they work well, so overall I'd say they're good as opposed to exceptional. Performance and comfort probably the best yet, but you pays your money, etc...

Overall rating: 7/10

About the tester

Age: 47  Height: 189cm  Weight: 94kg

I usually ride: whatever I'm testing...  My best bike is: Kinesis Tripster ATR, Merida Scultura, Dward Design fixed

I've been riding for: Over 20 years  I ride: Every day  I would class myself as: Experienced

I regularly do the following types of riding: road racing, time trialling, cyclo cross, commuting, touring, club rides, sportives, general fitness riding, fixed/singlespeed, mtb, Mountain Bike Bog Snorkelling, track

Dave is a founding father of, having previously worked on Cycling Plus and What Mountain Bike magazines back in the day. He also writes about e-bikes for our sister publication ebiketips. He's won three mountain bike bog snorkelling World Championships, and races at the back of the third cats.

Add new comment


Mungecrundle | 4 years ago

I seem to have had some issues about getting run over in the last 12 months and I don't wear headphones. I cannot imagine why anyone would voluntarily choose to degrade a primary sense in a potentially dangerous environment and replace it with the distraction of music or speech but maybe I'd be happier not hearing them come for me?

Sriracha replied to Mungecrundle | 4 years ago

The one time I've tried headphone (one ear only) was for satnav using something like Cyclestreets or Kmoot. It wasn't very successful on account of the lead getting snagged and tugging at my ear!
I've settled for having my phone head down in my handlebar bag with its speaker pointing up. Works OK at slower speeds!

roubaixcobbles | 4 years ago

Next up, the best semi-opaque eyewear for reducing your ability to see hazards? I know people don't want to hear it (hah!), but using anything that reduces the acuity of the second most important of your senses for cycling is just plain stupid.

hawkinspeter replied to roubaixcobbles | 4 years ago
Roubaixcobbles wrote:

Next up, the best semi-opaque eyewear for reducing your ability to see hazards? I know people don't want to hear it (hah!), but using anything that reduces the acuity of the second most important of your senses for cycling is just plain stupid.

But these allow you to hear environmental sounds, so what's the problem?

roubaixcobbles replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago

They are not going to allow you to hear as well as no headphones at all, are they? Wearing headphones of any sort is clearly opting to make a reduction in the ability of your ears to hear other things.

hawkinspeter replied to roubaixcobbles | 4 years ago
Roubaixcobbles wrote:

They are not going to allow you to hear as well as no headphones at all, are they? Wearing headphones of any sort is clearly opting to make a reduction in the ability of your ears to hear other things.

Whilst hearing can give you a useful advance warning of things behind you, it's also possible to look around more often to get the same benefit. Also, if you always check behind you before pulling out, turning or making some maneouvre then lack of hearing shouldn't be an issue.

It's not like you need especially good hearing to hear a car behind you, and besides, there's people cycling (and driving) who are completely deaf and they manage to be safe.

Or are you stating that people with hearing problems make unsafe drivers/cyclists?

(Personally, I'd be more worried about drivers not being able to hear things as they're encased in metal boxes, quite often with radio/music blaring whilst in control of heavy machinery)


roubaixcobbles replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago

I knew that red herring would come up! People with hearing problems have no choice about not being able to hear. People with good hearing who deliberately choose to impair it is an entirely different matter.

roubaixcobbles replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago

(Personally, I'd be more worried about drivers not being able to hear things as they're encased in metal boxes, quite often with radio/music blaring whilst in control of heavy machinery)

Absolutely - and that's why I need all of my senses working at their very best level when sharing a road with them and don't impair one of them by wearing headphones.

mdavidford replied to roubaixcobbles | 4 years ago

"second most important of your senses for cycling" - sense of balance? sense of proportion? sense of humour?

Nope - not seeing how wearing headphones affects any of those.

Fairhead | 4 years ago

I prefer my Philips Actionfit with bluetooth. They are supposed for runners, still working perfect for me. They fit snug and most important have open acoustics, so I hear traffic and alerts of my garmin and still deliever quality sound. People who complain about the sound quality in reviews, probably use them at home and compare them with cloused acoustics. Headwind still can have an effect on the volume, but perfectly ajustable with the remote. I use them now for more than one year on the road bike.
Oh and they just cost something round 30€.

Secret_squirrel | 4 years ago

Anyone have any experience on how they sound compared to a set of wireless ear buds with a transparent mode?

My assumption would be worse music but better road sound awareness but curious.

Have a set of sennheiser true wireless buds with a transparent mode so hence the question.

rjfrussell | 4 years ago

Sound quality improves damatically if you were earplugs.

Though that defeats the purpose, obvs.

daern | 4 years ago

I've had a pair of Aeropex for some 6 months now. To cut out the waffle: I love them and they have rapidly become my most-used headphones.

I'd agree with most of the feedback in the review - battery life is excellent, bluetooth stability is superb (I don't think they've ever dropped out on me) and the single control is excellent, even though my helmet strap runs right over the top if it!

Wind noise is probably the biggest downside, but it's normally only a problem when descending at speed, or in a tough headwind, at which point I just pause the audio (with the button on the left transducer) and resume again when things quieten down. In most rides, I can listen for at least 75% of the time. In recent days, I've tended to take my daily exercise while listening to the government daily briefing on the Coronavirus and they are perfect for this - if things get a bit noisy, I'll just pause for a few seconds until things quieten down.

Comfort-wise, I've been very happy with them. You can wear them all day and easily forget about them as they are so unobtrusive. They don't interfere with my road helmet (Kask Mojito), but I suspect would be less good with a low-backed MTB helmet, but I'm yet to try this as I've not worn them on the MTB yet.

Oddly, one of the things I like them for is listening to background music or audiobooks while pottering around in the garage or around the house. Because they don't block the ears, they are far less isolating than normal headphones which, in this case, is often a positive thing as it means that I can hear when  my wife calls to offer me a cup of tea - not something you would ever want to miss! Yes, the audio quality is not up with in-ear headphones, but oddly, the more I've used them, the less this seems to bother me and it's rarely a concern now. They're not much good for commuting on trains or walking through busy areas though - I've tried this and they get drowned out incredibly easily.

I love headphones and have a fair collection of different sorts - cheap and expensive, over-ear and in-ear, wired and wireless - but it's the Aeropex that I wear more than the rest combined because they are so comfy to wear, so unobtrusive and don't isolate me from the world. They're not perfect, but for how I tend to use them, I'm yet to find better.

Would I buy again? Yes, at the drop of a hat.

mdavidford replied to daern | 4 years ago
1 like

I'm not sure I'd be able to tell the difference between wind noise and the repetitive empty drone of the government daily briefings.

Danzxer | 4 years ago

I have the Aeropex aswell. And yes the sound quality isn't the best and on the bike windnoise can be overwelming but it's a sacrifice that's worth it to me for the ability to hear my surroundings. When running they are great on the bike they're like background music unless you're at low speed or a perfect tailwind. I wear glasses and haven't had any problem with them on that part but with headbands sound and comfort can be an issue. Is it a product for everybody no it really depends on what you're after, if you need to be able to hear your surroundings then yes these could be for you, sure several in ear headphones have a pass-through mode that could be an option.

KoenM | 4 years ago

Like alot of this kind of earphones that hang around the ear they look (and many are, I've tested a few) are very uncomfortable with glasses (I have prescription glasses), these even looks so big that it would even be hard to use glasses with it!

daern replied to KoenM | 4 years ago

I wear mine with sunglasses (Jawbreakers) on the bike all of the time - no problem at all. Can't comment on normal glasses that curve round the ear though - they might be more problematic.

dave atkinson replied to daern | 4 years ago
1 like

i've worn them with my prescription glasses, and various riding glasses, without any major issues. some glasses are better than others but they were all okay.

shufflingb replied to KoenM | 4 years ago
1 like

fwiw, I've had similar problems, but the previous generation of these (the Titaniums) are actually the most comfy over/on ear headphones I've yet found (out of many) for wearing with my prescription. The way they work is the ear loops rest lightly on top of the arms of the glasses frame. There's none of the normal headphone squashing of the ear onto the frame, or the frame into the side of the head. Certainly worth trying if spoken word listening with glasses is what is needed.

MrGear | 4 years ago

I have a pair of the Aftershokz Titanium model and I use them a lot... But rarely on the bike because of the aforementioned wind noise. They are great for running or when doing jobs about the house. The wind noise is less of an issue on a slow shopping bike though.

The older model is cheaper and uses a standard micro USB charger, which to me makes it better than the one reviewed here!

Sounds quality is not as good as in-ear headphones, but perfectly acceptable for the times I use them.

Russell Orgazoid | 4 years ago

I had some of these for Christmas.

Battery life is outstanding, build quality yes, very comfy and unobtrusive.

The main downside is a big one. The sound quality is mediocre at best. I imagine it is the limitation of the bone condustion design. I see Amazon reviews bigging up the sound quality but don't believe it. My £20 in ear headphones run rings around them.

Would I buy again: no.

Latest Comments