<html> At 07:51 PM 11/8/2005 -0500, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Hmmmmm. I had the assumption that a new piano design incorporated a new design for a plate to compliment the rest of the belly....   Terry Farrell <dl></blockquote> </dl>Yeah, but.... consider where the fish lies under the plate. How important is the mass of plate around the hitch pin field in that area? I don't know, but it seems like it may be better (stronger) as is. Aesthetics may be irrelevant, but a steeper curve to the rim might be less practical, also. The old Fortes with angles joints there all come apart to some extent at the joint. My '06 Ibach is like that, with a steep angle from the right side once the rim clears the keybed. Boat tail, floating bass. Ummmmm, good.  Lovely treble, too. Time to go play, bye. Guy <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite> <dl> <dd>----- Original Message ----- <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite> <dd>Looks like a gem Ron. Hard maple beams, belly rail & rim - man, that's gotta be one heckuva solid foundation! One question though. A fish, or treble cut-off, may be used to reduce the area of soundboard in the treble area of an existing instrument. But if designing and building a piano from scratch, and knowing of the desired reduced-compared-to-traditional soundboard area in the treble, what reason would there be to build the rim to traditional dimensions and add a fish, rather than simply altering the shape of the rim during design & building to reflect the desired smaller treble soundboard area - and hence not needing a fish? <dd>  <dd>To accommodate the plate, I bet. New design or not. <dd>The only reason I can think of is "because pianos are supposed to look like that." And I suppose a rim adjusted to reflect the smaller treble soundboard area would inspire too many questions? <dd>  <dd>Sorry. Overactive mind......   :-? <dd>  <dd>Terry Farrell</blockquote> <dd>Guy </dl></blockquote></html>