Why is Monster M1000i interconnect overlooked?

Why? Because it's not good enough for the money, that's why. Here http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/messages/108269.html is a longish note about a cable test my GEA friend and I did.

M1000i failed the test as being audible when inserted into the system by sounding rather soft...undetailed...in the important MR and treble frequencies.

You asked. :-)
.

When Jeffreybehr mentioned test...well, I knew he was in trouble! I didn't mean to imply that I needed a Jeffrybear to fill me in...I've owned more classic gear and cable combinations than most reviewers. All I can say is come on over and bring your ears...not the tester! You do have ears don't you???

Ooh, Dave, trying to be cute, or just nasty? The test instruments were indeed our ears.
.

Dave_b, this post made me curious and I just happened to have 2 XLR pairs of M1000i's laying around that I put back into my system replacing the Acoustic Zen reference II XLR's. The most noticeable difference was that the Zen's have a slightly smoother midrange and highs and a touch more definition in the base. The M1000i's on the other hand, seem a little "faster" giving guitar strings for example a little more "speed", "attack" and "bite". The Zen are a little smoother and warmer sounding without giving up resolution or dynamics. Focus, depth, width and height of the soundstage remained the same. In my system (BAT VK-250, VK-31SE, Meridian 588) switching between the Totem 1's and Arro's, the results were consistent and I prefer the Zen's. In a system that needs more "zest" or "jump" the M1000i's may just be the wake up call. At $200 as compared to $500 Zen's the M1000i's are an excellent "budget interconnect" and hold their own across the board, especially considering they can be had much cheaper pre-owned.

It's all synergy!