The Magico Q7 speakers on the VAC Statement 450 amps using Synergistic Research cables.

This room was kind of hidden away. At the end of a hallway filled with booths, one found oneself in a large room with lots of luscious displays of Synergistic Research cables. Off in the corner was a door with a strange handle, that the nice Synergisitc people would open for you, through which you found the room pictured here.

I went there 3 times and each time they were demoing these Synergistic ‘black hole’ tweaks [you can see one on the floor in the next photo. It looks like a tall cake box]. So they would play 30 to 60 seconds of music – stop for 10 – 20 seconds, and then replay it. From what I could tell the VAC drove the speakers nicely, but I really didn’t get to hear much here.

Rear of the Magico Q7 speaker. Notice the Tweak. Looks like an old Walker or Bybee binding post tweak.

The Q7 was up on castors.

The VAC Statement 450 amp.

The Hilton from the parking lot of the Atrium Hotel next door, where I had to get another memory card for my visit to the Magico, VAC, Synergistic Research room

On the way to the Magico room [this is the last day], an awards ceremony was happening the the courtyard. Somebody was winning something [and it wasn’t me :-)] was all I could gather.

The sole cigar booth was kind of a lonely spot. No, I don’t smoke cigars either.

Polymer’s $60K MKS-X loudspeakers driven by FM Acoustics amps and Thrax DAC. Enklein cables.

The speakers arrived mid morning on the day of the show, and then they struggled in this room with uncontrolled bass issues. I think it was the night of the first day of the show that they upended a couch and put it, behind the curtain, to make a more solid corner. Similarly they piled up the crates behind the faux curtain wall on the left side of the room to more correctly simulate the effect a real wall would have.

All told, by the 3rd day the sound was getting quite listenable, and, the somewhat contrived playlist not withstanding, for my money this was the best sound from a box speaker at the show.

The Polymer speakers use a 2.5 inch Accuton diamond midrange driver, the only other speaker to do so [that we know of and is a real speaker] besides the Marten Coltrane Supreme speakers, which we had here for many years.

So, you may ask, how do the two diamond midrange speakers compare to each other?

[We are comparing the Polymer to the $350K Marten Coltrane Supreme I speakers. Although we heard the $500K Supreme II speakers the next day after we heard these Polymer speakers, the Supreme II speakers were not at their best – they were in an un-optimized system driven by amps of unknown capabilities (the hot off the press Berning amps launched at the Munich show)].

First, there are a lot of similarities between the Polymer MKS-X and Marten Supreme I speakers.

The size [height] of the soundstage was quite impressive for such small speakers. Close enough to the Supreme 1 that I wasn’t complaining, and certainly taller that the soundstage of the smaller Kharmas.

The driver in common, the diamond midrange, covered 1200 Hz to 8000 Hz in the Supreme 1s. That is most of the music. Accounting for the fact that the Polymer speaker was brand new and diamond midrange not broken in, I heard little difference between the Polymer and the Supreme I midrange.

So, now for the all important below 1200 Hz range.

On the one hand we have 2 unpowered drivers in the 7 inch range (the Polymer) and on the other we have 5 unpowered 6 inch drivers (4 + 1) and 6, powered [i.e. active], 9 inch Accuton ceramic drivers (the Marten).

Contrary to what one might think, the Polymer has a gutsier, somewhat less controlled bass and the Marten Supreme I a very controlled, almost subtle bass that merges with the rest of the music almost invisibly.

I think the differences may narrow over time, with break-in of the MKS-X speakers and playing them in a real room with solid walls. Although the advantages of a speaker with well-executed active woofers like the Supreme I is hard to beat, the newer Supreme II speakers are, similar to the Polymer, 100% passive.

Comparing the MKS-X to the Supreme II:

MKS-X: 400 lbs, metal hybrid cabinet, 88db sensitive, $60K, house sound: ? [enthusiastically detailed?]
Supreme II: 500 lbs, wood and carbon fiber cabinet, 91db sensitive, $500K, house sound: calm accuracy

The accuracy [much of it unmeasurable] and efficiency of the Supreme II is well worth paying the big bucks for, and the big Wilsons, Magicos, YG Acoustics and big Focal each have their strengths, but I do think the MKS-X does play in this big league, box speaker, ballpark.

The MKS-X is woefully under-priced [like the PranaFidelity speakers]. They say they are not making any money on these. I can almost believe it given the price of those diamond midrange drivers. Given what I heard and what I know of the high-end speaker market, these should go for around $120K+ if not for their being only about 4 feet tall, the somewhat utilitarian fit-and-finish, and their being a relatively unknown, albeit very well-funded, brand.

A word to those who would buy these: they appear to be very sensitive to room dynamics and rely on a decent in-room response. I have a feeling that these may be more sensitive to placement than your average speaker.

Heck, we think the 270lb Acapella Atlas bass units are hard to get up, and down, the 45 steps to our front door, otherwise, just wearing our ordinary audiophile hats, we would be seriously interested. Though they DO ship in heavy-duty custom flight cases … and with wheels too…. 🙂 … but that is not going to help us in our mountain hideaway.

The Polymer MKS-X speakers, FM Acoustics 115 monoblock amplifiers, and Thrax Maximinus DAC, Weiss Man 301 Music Server and Weiss Jason Transport into FM 245 preamp on a Krolo Design rack.

Polymer MKS-X loudspeaker

Polymer MKS-X loudspeaker rear

Polymer MKS-X loudspeaker binding posts

Polymer MKS-X loudspeaker top

Polymer MKS-X loudspeaker front drivers