MATT NEWPORT: This is the PCB for the Micro Clock. This actually one that's bad meaning that there's an error on the board somewhere and we can't -- we won't be able to send it out. I think that one of the things that people often look for with the clock and we wanted to make something that was inexpensive because we knew it wasn't expensive to produce something that sounded good, it's just a matter of what are the right corners to cut. So in this case, we used a little Hammond BB chassis which is similar to a guitar pedal chassis because it's got excellent RF shielding which means it keeps everything inside and doesn't leak out and interfere with your TV or whatever. We don't have a display on it, we don't have any power indicator lights, nothing that we felt would artificially exaggerate the price. And yes, people have told us, "I wish it had this. I wish it had that," but you know the goal was to try and design something as good as we could design it while keeping the price down, and the question has been placed, "Well, how do you -- at that inexpensive of a price, how do you convince people that it's actually any good?" and it's interesting for us because we're so small, it actually works out well. It's kind of the opposite of the traditional economics model you'd think well you know if it's cheap and there's a lot of demand for it, you're going to have a saturation or a huge amount of people are going to purchase the product. But in our case, I think people tend to stand back from it because they think well that there's no way that it can be that good and be that inexpensive, and that works out well for us because we're so small we couldn't handle an enormous amount of demand.

So, the kind of people that tend to really appreciate what this product is capable of we found are people that work in the industry for a living, typically use Pro Tools HD systems. We find it first they're skeptical, they don't believe that it really can make any difference, and then once we play it for them they're just unbelievably impressed.

We weren't really trying to emulate something, and it's funny because we actually did take a look at some of the other stuff on the market, and I don't want to mention the manufacturer's names, and not because we wanted to pirate their design in anyway but we wanted to see, "Well okay, what are these people doing? How are they approaching it?" and it was funny because we found that a lot of times they were intentionally misusing a component in order to exaggerate a certain sound and that the amount the jitter that they had was so high that typically the high frequencies -- the mid range would sound really nice but then the high frequencies would be extremely collapsed, and what we wanted to do was just o give the richest, smoothest sound that we possibly could, so we, again going back to the sort of crystals that we use and this sort of noise suppression techniques we employ, and there's just no hint of graininess. There's just a nice fat mid range, lots of low-end extension, a real smooth high, and we think it outperforms a lot of the other stuff on the market, so.