Well, I have to take back my tone in my previous post regarding this book. I flipped through it at the bookstore the other day, and while I still found the poetic whimsy and airy fairy descriptiveness to be off-putting, I will say that she does a good job of bringing the complexity of a piano technician's work, as well as the temperamental and complex nature of the instrument itself, over to amateurs' language. And from what I read, it seems like she does learn and point out that the piano is never the exact same in tone or tune from one day to the next. I'd be tempted to pick it up, but I still started getting impatient just flipping through it in the store. I think mostly because it's draining to sit through so much descriptiveness and pointing out what to me is largely obvious, just to get through her own story. But that's me, not the book. Anyway, just wanted to post a "maybe I was wrong to put it that way" thing, for my own karma if nothing else. Thanks to the original poster who brought up the book in the first place! -holly quigley