Illustration by Lou Pimentel

1966-1970: The First Flats

In the beginning there were racing shoes. And runners saw that the shoes were good—for the few thin, athletic men who ran long distances at the time. Actually, they rather sucked, even for the young fast set.

“Very few running shoes were available, if they could be called that,” says running shoe collector and National Park Service museum curator Dave Kayser, who started running in 1966. “They were heavy and stiff, usually with leather or canvas uppers. All the choices were crappy.”

On the nascent road-running circuit of the mid-’60s, the New Balance Trackster had a virtual monopoly, at least in New England, says longtime Runner’s World editor and writer Amby Burfoot. Introduced in 1960, it had a leather upper and rubber ripple-sole, came in widths, and was “ideal for practically any running surface,” claimed ads of the time.

“When you got to a starting line of a road race, everybody was wearing the same shoe,” Burfoot recalls. “It had a palpable amount of cushioning or springiness that the others did not have. The minute that somebody offered us a shoe with a little bit of cushioning from road shock, we all went in that direction, because it felt good.”

By the 1968 Boston Marathon, which he won, Burfoot had switched to the Onitsuka Tiger Marathon, which many runners of the day remember fondly for its light weight and comfortable fit. Tiger’s training shoe, the Road Runner, had a built-up heel and foam rubber “midsole”—a new term at the time. “That was one of the first shoes that felt like a real road-running shoe,” Burfoot says.

Burfoot bought his Tigers from Jeff Johnson, who was the first employee of a new company called Blue Ribbon Sports. The startup, founded by Phil Knight and Bill Bowerman, Oregon track coach and advocate of jogging for the masses, was importing shoes from Japan and selling them out of the back of vehicles at track meets and road races.

Tiger quickly became the brand of choice for road runners.

The Guides: What Do Runners Like?

Johnson wrote the first shoe guide in Distance Running News, the magazine that would become Runner’s World. While he admits that he had a big conflict of interest, he was one of the few people at the time who knew enough about the running-shoe industry to write a guide. Johnson polled a large sample of runners gleaned from the Road Runners Club of America mailing list and, he says, “removed myself from the equation as much as I possibly could and tried my best to keep it as neutral as possible.”

The guide, in the April 1967 issue, featured 14 “flats.” Eleven of those models came from three brands: Adidas, New Balance, and Tiger. The reviews spent as much time discussing each brand’s overall reputation as it did detailing the differences in the fairly similar shoe offerings.

Each review included selected quotes, most being some variation of “Absolutely the best racing shoe I’ve ever worn.” The guide listed “best” shoes in two categories. The Tiger Road Runner topped the training category; Tiger’s Marathon led the racing shoe list.

Timeline

1960

New Balance Trackster debuts. It’s one of the first shoes designed specifically for road running.

Photograph courtesy of New Balance

1962

Phil Knight visits Japan and sets up Blue Ribbon Sports to import Tiger shoes to the U.S.

1967

The first shoe reviews appear in the April issue of Distance Running News detailing 14 models.

Photograph courtesy of Runner's World

Tiger Marathon is named best racing shoe in Distance Running News.

Onitsuka Tiger Cortez is the first highly cushioned running shoe, developed with guidance from Bill Bowerman.

Illustration by Lou Pimentel

1971-1981: Enter Cushioning

Four years later, in July 1971, Runner’s World released a 46-page booklet called “All About Distance Running Shoes.” The guide gathered opinions from 800 readers. The average respondent was a 29-year-old, 5'9", 145-pound man who had been running 50 miles per week for six years.

Readers named a whopping 66 models from 32 brands that they trained or raced in. Most of those brands, however, were obscure—the vast majority wore Tiger, Adidas, New Balance, and expensive mail-order shoes from EB Lydiard, a brand born out of a collaboration between famed New Zealand coach Arthur Lydiard and the German EB Brutting company. More than 60 percent of the readers surveyed ran in Tiger shoes, and their models topped the popularity lists in both training and racing.

Tiger’s Marathon won praise for its glove-like fit and flexible, “barefoot” feel. But their top training model, the Cortez, offered something groundbreaking: cushioning. The first shoes designed for American runners by Bowerman, they had a sponge-rubber midsole with a wedge-shaped second layer of cushioning under the heel to absorb impact and reduce stress on the Achilles tendon. In 1972, the Cortez became the flagship shoe of the new company, Nike, that Bowerman and Knight founded when they broke from Tiger.

The Cortez’s popularity established that runners wanted cushioning. It wasn’t long before shoe designers found a superior material to provide it. Jerry Turner, who was then president of Brooks, had been making athletic shoes for other sports for 20 years. Turner wasn’t a runner, but he knew shoes and he knew how to listen.

As Turner tells it, “I received a phone call from a guy named Marty Liquori, who was a world-class runner at the time. Marty had seen some of our attempts at jogging shoes at a trade show and he said, ‘Your stuff really looks interesting, but I’d like to sit down with you and discuss it.’ He gave me an education.”

Turner took Liquori’s suggestions to a representative from the Monarch Rubber Company in Baltimore. “I wanted more rebound, better shock absorption, lighter weight—five or more specific things,” Turner says. “The guy said, ‘I think I’ve got just the thing for you. I’ll be back tomorrow.’ And the next day he comes back and shows me EVA.”

EVA, or ethylene vinyl acetate, an air-infused foam, is still the primary ingredient in most running shoe midsoles. Brooks put the material in their 1975 Villanova, which quickly drew attention. Almost immediately, other companies started using the soft, bouncy foam, at the time cut from sheets and layered in the midsole. In 1981, Nike released the first shoe with a molded midsole made out of what they called Phylon, a compressed form of EVA developed by Mattel for bath toys.

In this era of explosive growth and innovation, companies were tinkering with other parts of the shoe as well. In Oregon, Bill Bowerman started melting rubber in the kitchen, and soon “waffle” soles graced several Nike models. Similar designs covered the bottom of other brands, and the inspiration can still be seen in outsole design.

“I always think the outsole is a bit underdone in terms of the credit it should get,” says Simon Bartold, podiatrist and shoe design consultant. “The waffle sole is a good example: It defined not only grip but also flex characteristics of the shoe and, to a large scale, the cushioning, which it was quite effective in providing.”

Nylon uppers had all but replaced leather by 1976, with mesh options starting to appear. And women began to find models that weren’t just “shrink-and-pink” versions of men’s shoes. “By the early ‘80s, most larger brands were using women-specific lasts,” says Martyn R. Shorten, Ph.D., biomechanics researcher and director of the Runner’s World Shoe Lab.

The Guides: We Define the Best

As the number of options grew, Bob Anderson, Runner’s World’s founder and publisher, felt the need to provide readers with an evaluation of those shoes from a reliable and trusted authority. Consulting podiatrists, runners, and shoe manufacturers, the staff created a list of criteria for what makes a good running shoe and scored each shoe against that list. The ranking criteria favored shoes with thick, durable soles and a high heel lift, while still lightweight and with a flexible forefoot. It also gave points for a strong heel counter, arch and shank support, and pliable uppers.

Starting in 1975, Runner’s World released an annual ranking of the best-selling shoes on the market. Adidas’s SL-72, a German response to early Tiger road shoes, took top honors in the first guide, which combined training and racing shoes. It garnered praise for its popularity, heel lift of nearly one half inch, rigid heel counter, soft nylon upper, and flexibility—although the forefoot was said to be cramped and inadequately cushioned.

Such a ranking assured the success of the top-rated shoe, while provoking controversy among runners and manufacturers.

To increase the reliability of the rankings, Anderson hired Peter Cavanaugh, director of the biomechanics laboratory at Penn State University, to conduct the first objective measurements of cushioning, flexibility, and durability. Cavanaugh’s data, which first appeared in 1977, represented an improvement over previous methodology such as measuring shoe thickness and assigning values of “good,” “fair,” and “poor.”

A panel of 10 experts also ranked the shoes subjectively, and these marks were combined with the lab rankings. “The shoe that had the highest score was the winner,” Anderson says. Brooks developed its Vantage with an eye on the RW criteria, and it topped the list in 1977, establishing the brand among runners.

The Vantage stood out because it was the first shoe to acknowledge the need to control the inward rotation of the foot, or pronation. Under advice from podiatrist Steven Subotnick, author of Cures for Common Running Injuries, Brooks inserted a wedge so that the whole foot slanted outward.

In 1978, with more quality models rapidly advancing, the magazine abandoned ordinal rankings and initiated a star system. Five stars represented “A shoe that could be termed excellent. Highly recommended.” One star meant “Better left in the box.”

The star system spread the wealth, but companies still objected, claiming the results were rigged. Nike pulled its advertising for several years, feeling they were being treated unfairly, but the magazine held its position.

Anderson has no regrets. “I think it was a very important part of the magazine, and very important to the whole running scene,” he says. ‘‘There was a rapid change in the quality of the shoes. It helped companies understand what runners needed. We set the stage.”

Timeline

1972

Nike Cortez is the flagship shoe for the company Bowerman and Knight started when they split from Tiger.

Nike

Nike Waffle Racer is the first production shoe with Bowerman’s studded rubber outsole.

1975

Runner’s World publishes first annual Shoe Guide.

Brooks introduces the first shoe with an EVA midsole, the Villanova. The material becomes the standard midsole.

1976

New Balance 320 is named the top shoe in Runner’s World’s expanded rankings.

1977

Brooks Vantage, with a “varus wedge” (higher arch side for more support), ranks #1 in RW’s annual guide.

1978

Nike Air Tailwind is released. It’s the first “Air” shoe, and most agree it doesn’t work well.

New Balance W320 is the first shoe “designed exclusively for women,” with a snugger-fitting heel and wider forefoot.

Illustration by Lou Pimentel

1982-2003: The Age of Control

Following the earlier success of the Vantage, other brands began to incorporate more aggressive motion-control features.

In 1982, two shoes simultaneously introduced a new idea that would represent a “sea change” in running-shoe design, says JD Denton, longtime Shoe Guy columnist and footwear reviewer for Running Times. The Tiger X-Caliber GT appeared with a “stabilizing pillar” under the arch side of the heel, while Brooks’s new Chariot featured an angled wedge of harder-density foam in the midsole, thicker on the inside of the shoe and tapering toward the outside. Both devices were representative of the “medial post” that is built into stability shoes even today.

Stability would quickly become the first consideration for runners. “People were making a strong link between pronation and injury,” says Bartold.

Choosing shoes became similar to getting fit for corrective eyeglasses, a process of matching the level of support necessary for your pronation problem.

The Chariot would evolve into the Beast, and the X-Caliber GT morphed into the Asics Kayano—both of which live on today. New Balance’s luxurious and stable 990, the first $100 model, also introduced in 1982, continues to be sold in 2016.

With the defining characteristic of shoes established, little significant happened for the next two decades. Materials would improve, but none can point to any game-changing innovation. Instead, the focus changed to marketing.

Shorten points to the first visible Nike Air Max shoe, in 1989, as the turning point. Being able to see the cushioning tech “just rocked,” Shorten says. “From then on, everybody had to have visible technology—whether it was gel, grid, hydro-flow—everybody had to have their little bit of goop, and it had to be visible.”

More was more during the ‘90s. “The more bells and whistles you could put into the shoes, the better,” says Shane Downey, global director of Brooks Heritage. Turner recalls the era as delivering “an awful lot of hype, but nothing functional that improved the ability to run.”

The Guides: New Categories

When Burfoot became Editor-in-Chief of Runner’s World in the mid-1980s, he had enjoyed reading the rankings and loved the simplicity—as a consumer. “It took all the decision making out of your hands and told you to just go to the store and buy the number-one rated shoe,” he says. But Burfoot discovered that the industry was questioning the evaluation methods. “They pointed out that the shoe is an entire system with all of the pieces working together,” Burfoot says. “On top of that, you throw in the individual characteristics of the runner.”

Burfoot’s deputy editor, Bob Wischnia, agreed. “I didn’t believe in shoe testing,” Wischnia says. “Machines don’t wear shoes, people do.” And he didn’t want to use ordinal rankings. “How can a shoe be number one if it doesn’t work for everybody?” The mechanical testing ended in 1982, and Burfoot and Wischnia beefed up the wear-testing process.

Reflecting the industry emphasis on pronation, the new guides presented shoes in categories of “Motion Control,” “Stability,” “Neutral-Cushioned,” and “Lightweight.” These categories were widely adopted by manufacturers, influencing how shoes were marketed and presented in running stores, and how runners talked about them.

In the late 1990s, the guides began calling out superior models with awards. The Asics GT-2020 won the first “Editor’s Choice” award in the April 1997 issue.

Burfoot admits that the reviews, like the shoes they reflected, got a bit similar, but the guides served a purpose. “Clearly the greatest benefit of the shoe surveys through all those years is it did weed out the bad shoes.”

Timeline

1982

New Balance 990, using every new technology available, is a plush stability shoe that sells for $100. Still available, it is the most persistent model in running-shoe history.

New Balance

Brooks Chariot defines the motion-control category with a “Diagonal Rollbar” midsole and a sturdy heel counter that extended to the ball of the foot.

1983

Nike Pegasus is the first air-cushioned shoe with a performance ride. Version 33 continues the line today.

The popular Adidas Marathon Trainer, with its rugged, tri-foil studded sole and extended heel, is an early crossover shoe, well suited for both road and trail.

1984

Asics Tiger X-Caliber GT deploys the first plastic medial post to control pronation, the inward rotation of the foot.

1985

Nike Sock Racer is an early attempt at a shoe that cushions without controlling.

Nike

1986

Asics GT-II, the first Gel shoe, is released.

1987

New shoe company Ryka debuts, making fitness shoes exclusively to fit women’s feet and stride.

Asics Gel Lyte debuts; the line will set the standard for lightweight performance stability shoes for the next decade.

Asics

1989

Adidas ZX8000 introduces the brand’s iconic Torsion system.

1993

Asics Gel-Kayano Trainer epitomizes the high-tech, cushioned and stable era. The line continues today with 2016’s Kayano 23.

1995

Asics GT-2000 is released. The GT series, still running strong, will join the Brooks Adrenaline GTS as one of the best-selling running shoes in history.

1996

Nike Air Rift, with a split toebox and “barefoot” feel, appears a decade too early to be popular.

1998

The RW Shoe Guide expands to the web, allowing us to review many more models, and readers to search for reviews.

1999

Brooks Adrenaline GTS is introduced. It would quickly be the “go to” stability shoe for millions of runners. The 17th iteration continues the line today.

Brooks

2001

In a paper submitted to the Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine, researcher Benno Nigg proposes that impact forces and excess pronation do not lead to injury in the way we have understood, and introduces the idea of a “preferred movement path.”

Illustration by Lou Pimentel

2004-2011: The Great Disruption

In the early years of the new millennium, rumblings began to be heard below the surface of the shoe industry. Researchers like Bartold and biomechanics researcher Benno Nigg reported that they had failed to find a connection between pronation and injury. Others, like Peter Bruggeman, were finding that feet get stronger when you remove highly supportive shoes. Harvard professor Daniel Lieberman published a widely read article in Nature that helped popularize the idea that running is natural and that we need no additional support or correction.

In Boston, a longtime runner named Tony Post was trying to recover from knee surgery. Post was then president and CEO of the U.S. branch of sole maker Vibram. On a trip to Italy, he saw a concept shoe that fit like a glove. Post, who could no longer run more than three or four miles without pain in traditional shoes, took the FiveFingers out for a run. The shoe forced him to run more lightly, with a rapid stride. Soon he’d gone three miles and his knee hadn’t hurt.

“I’m thinking to myself, Was my form bad? Was all that cushioning interfering? Maybe this is my solution,” Post recalls. “Then I started thinking, Maybe there are other people like me.” As he continued running, Post says, “It caused me to remember, I’ve done this before. When we were running cross country in college, my coach had us do strides across the football field barefoot.”

Designers at Nike were also paying attention to those barefoot strides. Consulting with Stanford coach Vin Lananna, they built a shoe that would simulate a “free” feeling while still providing protection. Elsewhere in the world, runners were searching for solutions to persistent problems and, like the innovators of the ‘70s, began cobbling together solutions.

In Utah, former high school cross-country champion Golden Harper put shoes in a toaster oven so he could pull them apart and remove the built-up heel. In France, adventure-racer Jean-Luc Diard applied ideas he learned designing ski equipment and bike wheels to running shoes, coming up with a fat tire-like shoe that swallowed terrain. In Switzerland, world duathlon champion Olivier Bernhard, trying to combine cushioning and propulsion, glued rubber staple-like pods to the bottom of a racing flat and ran 20K uphill. In Boulder, Danny Abshire, ultrarunner, running form coach, and custom orthotic specialist, set to work on a shoe that would reward a forefoot-oriented stride.

At the same time, consumers were desperately seeking something new in their shoes. “We were in a total innovation vacuum—basically what companies were doing was just adding stuff and making s--- heavier,” says Bartold. “Shoes had something like 22 different icons representing technologies in that shoe. Everybody was sick and tired of very rigid shoes. It was the perfect storm.”

That storm broke over the industry in the form of minimalism, which achieved the status of religion. Born to Run, the best-selling book by Chris McDougall, was its bible, and in it, overbuilt shoes and the shoe companies that made them were the devil.

Sales of FiveFingers skyrocketed. Every shoe company scrambled to introduce their bounversion of a minimalist shoe to meet the new demand.

The trend, however, wasn’t just toward less shoe. The status quo had been disrupted. It was an opening of the mind as to how a running shoe could look and act. Those innovators around the world, struggling to build a better shoe, came up with Newtons, Ons, Hokas, and Altras—shoes with pods on the bottom, huge rockered soles, wide forefeet.

“Minimalism was a bit of a gift for the industry,” says Bartold. “It made everybody sit up and pay attention, and made the big five [Adidas, Asics, Brooks, New Balance, Nike] get up off their bums and stop being so lazy.” Shorten points out that the real push for change within big companies also came when oil and labor prices peaked, so making less-complex shoes with less material was financially attractive as well. Regardless of the forces that caused it, the result was a boon for runners.

The Guides: Scientific Lab Testing

By the mid-2000s, the advent of the internet added to the barrage of content available to runners. When David Willey became Editor-in-Chief of Runner’s World in 2003, he set about to elevate the magazine’s guides above the competitive field. “We had the opportunity to start doing some objective testing to improve the advice we could give people,” Willey says. “And also to cement Runner’s World’s authority as the place to go to learn about shoes.”

Willey hired biomechanist Ray Fredericksen and set up the Runner’s World Shoe Lab in Lansing, Michigan. Fredericksen had been part of a committee that standardized shoe measurements and was thrilled to be using them. “Now, we had an objective measure that fit like a spine to anchor the subjective comments of the wear-testers,” Fredericksen says.

But subjective feedback still provided information that mechanical tests couldn’t, details about nebulous characteristics like fit and ride. So Willey moved to make the program more ambitious. “We wanted to not lose sight but amplify the subjective, human feedback from actual runners,” Willey says. “I felt that was the formula for the gold-standard shoe reviews: really comprehensive and trusted scientific testing and also comprehensive and trusted human feedback.”

This new data was presented using color ranges so as to not overwhelm the reader with numbers. “Even just adding the charts to our reviews, it sent the signal, especially to running geeks, that we were delivering a much higher level of service,” Willey says.

Timeline

2004

Nike Free is introduced as a training tool to strengthen your feet.

Nike

Vibram FiveFingers, a water shoe, soon becomes the symbol of minimalism.

Nature publishes Harvard professor Daniel Lieberman’s article “Born to Run,” which argues for barefoot running as the way humans are meant to move.

2005

Adidas 1 is released with a built-in computer and pressure sensor to change the cushioning to optimize your stride.

Getty Images

2006

Nike+ shoes debut, with a built-in mileage and pace-tracking pod.

2007

First Newton shoes sold at a California triathlon.

2009

Hoka One One releases highly cushioned model.

Hoka

2010

Saucony Kinvara debuts as a cushioned shoe with a low heel-toe drop, and it becomes an instant classic.

Asics GT-2160 wins Editor’s Choice award, the sixth EC and ninth award in 10 years for the series.

Brooks Adrenaline wins Best Update, its sixth award in eight years.

2011

New Balance releases its Minimus trail and road models.

New Balance

Vibram makes $100 million on sales of FiveFingers shoes.

Altra releases models with different names for the men’s (Instinct) and women’s (Intuition) models to highlight that, while they share similar characteristics, the women’s shoe was designed and built on entirely different specs.

Illustration by Lou Pimentel

2012-Present: The Age of Comfort

If minimalism exploded like a supernova, it burned out just as fast. It promised too much and failed to deliver. People still got injured, in ways new and old. The shoes didn’t turn users into smooth-running Kenyans.

It ended badly. When Vibram was sued in 2012 for false advertising, the heel-striking masses gleefully dragged the cult’s icon out of the city gates and stoned it. More than 150,000 claims were filed in the $3.75 million class-action lawsuit.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the execution. The fanatical fervor died but some of the ideas lived on. Shoes got lighter and simpler. Heel-toe drops came down, even as the pendulum swung back toward thicker, ultra-cushioned soles.

Many of the new companies that were born in the great disruption thrived. Even Tony Post moved on from Vibram, before the lawsuit, to found Topo, building shoes that combine minimalist philosophy with the reality that people need and want cushioning.

Companies are using new materials, like expanded thermoplastic polyurethane foam, in a race to improve rebound, creating a bouncy feel runners appreciate, as proven by the success of Adidas’s Boost models. And designers are creating uppers with innovative knits, redefining shoe comfort and reducing waste.

Perhaps soon, companies will be able to print and knit shoes to account for asymmetries in each runner’s anatomy and stride, as well as personal preferences. We’re not there yet, but, in the current universe of models—from max-cushioned to minimal, soft, firm, or bouncy ride, traditional fit to high-top knit, and shapes for all sorts of feet—it’s hard to imagine a runner couldn’t find one that will take them on hundreds of happy miles.

The Guides: A Spectrum of Shoes

With minimalism disrupting traditional design and new materials changing how shoes performed, the categories that had served well for nearly three decades began to feel arbitrary and inappropriate.

“We found ourselves grouping shoes into categories that didn’t feel right for what those shoes were actually doing,” says Willey. “It was time for the system to evolve.”

In 2009, Martyn Shorten, whose BioMechanica in Portland, Oregon, had served as the Runner’s World Shoe Lab since 2008, began a study to group runners using easy-to-identify characteristics such as body mass index, years of experience, or how prone they were to injury. At the same time, Shorten was sifting through his extensive database to arrive at more useful shoe sorts. Meanwhile, Willey and other editors were having discussions throughout the industry to take the pulse on what was deemed important.

The March 2012 issue featured a new layout, which opened with a flowchart asking runners questions about themselves and their running, and directed them to clusters of shoes arranged from “more shoe” to “less shoe.” Online, Shorten’s data powered a complex Shoe Finder that allowed for more questions and refined the recommendations.

In 2015, Shorten and the editors refined the questions that sort runners into groups and presented shoes on a two-dimensional grid. The grid still goes from less shoe to more shoe, but adds a cushioning dimension to tell more about the shoes at a glance and provide more-nuanced clusters of models with similar performance characteristics.

The reviews, which appear in the magazine six times a year (four road, two trail), require more than two months to prepare. Every new shoe that companies send gets put on the feet of wear-testers in four locations around the country—more than 350 diverse runners put miles on shoes for at least one month. Meanwhile, at the RW Shoe Lab in Portland, the shoes are weighed, the tops get cut off, and they are pounded and flexed by an array of machines taking precise measurements.

This combination of objective data with subjective wear-testing feedback is the most effective way to help you find the best shoes for you today. After all the numbers are crunched and models are researched, you’ll put on a pair of shoes and know that they are right. And they will become your friends and training partners, taking you on adventures through streets, trails, back roads, and urban racecourses—they’re still the most important purchase a runner will ever make.

Timeline

2012

Nike releases its first shoe with a knit upper, the Flyknit Racer. A yellow version was worn by Americans on the podium at the London Olympics.

Vibram is sued for false claims in advertising that the shoes could reduce foot injuries and strengthen foot muscles. Vibram settled, with 150,000 filing claims to receive part of the settlement.

2013

Adidas releases first models with Boost midsole foam, providing better cushioning and bounce-back responsiveness, according to the Runner’s World Shoe Lab.

Thomas MacDonald

Hoka One One is purchased by Deckers, and sales of max-cushioned models continue to climb.

2015

Puma introduces the Ignite and enters the energy-return war.

Saucony introduces a layer of its energy-return foam, Everun, under the sockliner in a majority of its models.

2016

Nike LunarEpic Flyknit released, using an advanced knit upper and laser-cut grooves in the sole to create a unique ride.

Nike

New Balance Zante Generate is the first running shoe with a 3-D-printed midsole. The company sells all 44 pairs at $400 a pair.

Adidas PureBoost X, a women’s-only model, is designed with the upper detached from the midsole under the arch.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io