Monster Cable Interlink 400 Speaker Cables

2.55/5 (78 Reviews)


Product Description



Review Options:  Sorted by Latest Review | Sort by Best Rating

Reviews 1 - 5 (78 Reviews Total) | Next 15

User Reviews

Overall Rating:2
Value Rating:1
Submitted by K-Bob a Audio Enthusiast

Date Reviewed: June 1, 2017

Bottom Line:   

I wrote a review of these back in July 2000. And guess what? They're still in my system 17 years later.
Why???
My system is a slowly evolving thing, and I'm the kind of guy who would rather shuffle wire around than lay out $$ for new. I have added a few components over the years so have always needed an extra interconnect.
For the past several years the Interlink 400 has been on my (cheap) tuner. I figured the tuner doesn't sound that great anyway, and who listens critically to the radio?
However, I recently changed things around and put the freebie cables that came with my spendy NAD CD player on the tuner instead. And, wow, the radio sounds pretty good now.
So, freebie generics (albeit high-quality ones) are better overall than the Interlink 400.
These cables are definitely on the way out of my system.

For now though, the Interlink 400 are feeding my subs where they are not required to provide good separation or brilliant highs. They just have to transmit 50Hz and below. The subs sound ok with them.
But I wonder if the bass impact and clarity would be better with something else, or does the "muddiness" of these cables sort of enhance the bass? Hmm...
I will probably replace them with something fairly cheap like WireWorld Terra or maybe even some Stinger wires.

For reference, the other interconnects in my primary chain are:
AudioQuest Tower .... USB DAC to preamp
WireWorld Orbit III+ .... CD to preamp
XLO/VDO ER-5 .... preamp to amp

Rotel preamp
B&K power amp
Monitor Audio Bronze II speakers

Expand full review >>

Used product for:   More than 1 year

Duration Product Used:   Audio Enthusiast

Product model year:   Pre 1995



Overall Rating:5
Value Rating:5
Submitted by Bill S. a AudioPhile

Date Reviewed: November 10, 2014

Bottom Line:   
These people have built cables for 30 years.They know what a cable should sound like.I find these to be exellent with a sound that is an amalgam of individual instruments not merely a large homogeneous mass.

Expand full review >>

Used product for:   More than 1 year

Duration Product Used:   AudioPhile

Product model year:   2010



Overall Rating:4
Value Rating:5
Submitted by Stephen Fleschler a AudioPhile

Date Reviewed: May 4, 2008

Bottom Line:   
On the following site is a full review of this hated and loved cable.
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/400e.html
Exerpted: The 400 mkII has a very good tonal balance, with no evident emphasis of a particular frequency range.

The quality of the bass range shines though, since it is very powerful, extended and punchy. With respect to the bass performance the 400 mkII can easily be compared with cables that cost twice its price. No doubt about this: if you feel your interconnects are a little bit on the light side, hook up a pair of 400 mkII's and the bass range will resurrect!

The high range is on the smooth side and thanks to the neutral mid range this cable can be defined as slightly warm which is a plus when used into those budget systems it is intended for. It has a kind of velvet touch that makes bearable even an overbright system.

Dynamics
The velvet touch remains evident even in the dynamic behaviour of this cable: while the bass range is very lively and punchy the mid/high range is much more relaxed and easy. So don't expect thrilling and faster-than-light drums solos, for example, as the 400 mkII prefers to play this instrument with lots of punch in the bass and smoothness in the highs. Sometimes, when coupled with edgy components the upper midrange of the 400 can become a little bit harsh.
It is not a very fast cable, as said before, but attacks and decays are still pretty natural.

3D imaging
Because of its performance in the mid/high range the soundstage created by the 400 is wide but a bit out of focus, as you were listening far away from the players. You know that the closer you sit to the instruments the better they appear to your ears. With the 400 it seems you are listening to the players in the back seats of the concert hall, just to give you an idea.

So height, width and depth are good and the players into this soundstage are just smoothly defined, all with a sense of blurred contours that is not negative at all. It is a way to reproduce the soundstage that many audiophiles prefer.

Conclusions
If you're in the market for a budget interconnect the Monster Interlink 400 mk II is something that you should try before buying. It is one of the cables with the best performance/price ratio I've ever listened to and, if you're using the cheaper 100 and 200, believe me, the 400 mkII is a giant step forward.

I've used them on E.A.R. equipment (864 pre-amp, 324 phono, 890 amp, E.A.R. CD player and with a VPI TNT/SME IV/Benz Ruby, Focus Speakers. This is a mid-high end system.

The cables are full bodied as the review states, slightly veiling, slightly less focused, slightly dulled in the highs but the overall balance and effect is highly musical. I am an archival transfer engineer for a symphony and local choirs, have transferred int'l archive recordings (universities too) and sing in a choir. With a larger collection of LPs, CDs, 78s, etc. then can be sanely heard more than three times in a year (continuously played) , I know what I like in sound as due my audio engineer friends. These are OKAY cables with very acceptable sound characteristics. I'm running 1 and 2 meter lengths after a 72 hour burn-in for secondary and tertiary systems as well. I lilke them.

Expand full review >>

Used product for:   3 Months to 1 year

Duration Product Used:   AudioPhile

Product model year:   2006

Price Paid:    $25.00

Purchased At:   ebay and Buy.com



Overall Rating:1
Value Rating:1
Submitted by bcastine a Audio Enthusiast

Date Reviewed: September 7, 2004

Bottom Line:   
I have tried to justify using these cables in my sytem. They look nice, well made with a durable finish but quite frankly sound like a#$. Used to connect my adcom gtp-500II to my 2 adcom 545II amps the soundstage just plain disappears when compared to a set of radio shack golds. Highs become very congested, cymbals turn to a plain hiss and vocals are very grainy. Bass is acceptable and on par with the RS golds, maybe I will try the monsters on the woofer channels but every time I try them I soon end up yanking them out. I've never been overly impressed with the cheaper monster interlinks but never as disappointed as I was with the 400's.

Expand full review >>

Used product for:   More than 1 year

Duration Product Used:   Audio Enthusiast

Price Paid:    $40.00



Overall Rating:1
Value Rating:1
Submitted by mitmantim a AudioPhile

Date Reviewed: January 6, 2004

Bottom Line:   
This particular interconnect blows major goats and I am NOT a Monster Cable basher.I own a pair of 80$ Monster Z1 speaker cables and they sound great on my B&W dm602s and Pioneer Elite components.This interconnect is worse than the lower priced mkII300 interconnect and at the time I actually prefered the sound of my optical cable over it. People, do yourself a favor and leave your local strip-mall Circuit City or Good Guys and venture off to the nearest Hi-Fi shop. Any sub100$ Straightwire or Audioquest interconnect sounds galaxies better. Kills the imaging, muddles the bass, adds grain to the highs, only slightly better dynamic performance than an OTB cable........Brought to you by the proponents for Audioquest Cables INC

Expand full review >>

Used product for:   More than 1 year

Duration Product Used:   AudioPhile

Price Paid:    $40.00

Purchased At:   Circuit City




Reviews 1 - 5 (78 Reviews Total) | Next 15

Review Options:  Sorted by Latest Review | Sort by Best Rating