Typewriter Picnic

James, Ash & Kevin


Typecast via Voss 50


James Copeland writing his script for Asbestos Falls

Kevin typing his journal

The ribbon cover is fitted and functional, and the carriage return lever doesn't hit it, though the clearance is close. I also had to router out a bit of wood from underneath, in order for some of the middle type slugs to not hit the frame as they return to their rest position.



I designed the shape of the opening on a whim, then drafted it onto thin cardboard as a template, before transferring to the 1/8" thick craft wood panel.



It'll take plenty of sanding, primer, more sanding, more primer, before the final coats of semi-gloss black. While there are other ways to fashion a makeshift ribbon cover, this method I enjoy.

The Numbers Game

When I first acquired this comptometer from a local thrift store several years ago, I'd noticed the worn keycaps, indicating years of long fingernails on keys (there's even a hint of red fingernail polish on some), but didn't understand at the time why only the 1 through 5 keys showed this wear, nor why the 3 keys seemed especially worn. Now I understand.



Then I located this archived scan of the book How to Use the Calculator and Comptometer, Third Edition, by James R. Meehan, distributed by Gregg Publishing, and finally sat down today to read up on the formal method of comptometer use.

As it turns out, the book teaches a "touch method" whereby the first and second fingers of the right hand are located on the 3 row - the home row - and the fingers are permitted to reach from the 1 to the 5 keys. For addition and subtraction, numbers larger than 5 are entered in a two-step process; for example, 7 is entered by pressing 4, then 3, in rapid succession. It may seem slower than directly entering the 7, but this method enables the user to enter these numbers by feel, keeping one's eyes on the work at hand, and thus ends up being faster in practical use.

This explains the wear on only the 1-5 keys, and the excessive wear on the 3 row. The user(s) of this machine (my sample dates back to ~1915) obviously were schooled in use by the Gregg method, which I find very interesting.

I should also mention that the odd-numbered key caps are dished in, while the even key caps are flat, making it easy to navigate the keyboard by feel.

Okay, but is using this machine any faster than a crank-operated adding machine of its day, or a modern electronic calculator (or computer keyboard) of today? I can say without a doubt yes! The Gregg method requires the use of the first and second fingers of either or both hands, and the entire number is entered in at once, parallel fashion. Emphasis is made on using the correct fingering technique for efficient number entry; the fingers hover over a group of keys to form the number being entered, and they are all pressed down at once. Being a "key operated" adding machine means as soon as the keys are pressed the calculation is performed and the digits in the register dials immediately indicate the result, real-time, as the calculation progresses, by means of the machine's internal planetary gear mechanism. This is the difference between a comptometer and a lever-operated adding machine.

By the way, the lever on the right side of the Burroughs machine is for clearing the machine, not for number entry.

For example, to add three 3-digit numbers, the right hand forms each number in turn and makes three rapid presses of the keys, which takes less than two seconds. I can't do this same sequence of operations (adding three 3-digit numbers), using a conventional electronic calculator or keyboard, nearly as fast. The difference in speed is amazing.

Subtraction uses the smaller sets of numbers on each key, which are the 9-complements of the main numbers, and the technique is to enter the complement number that's 1 less than the actual number being subtracted. For example, to subtract 18, the user simultaneously presses the 8 and 2 keys on the tens and units columns, which corresponds to the 1 and 7 complement numbers (i.e. 1 less than 18). In practice this is entirely intuitive and easy.

I'd already grasped addition and subtraction before I found this manual online, so what I was interested in was discovering how multiplication and division worked. Would they be difficult and time-consuming to learn? Surprisingly, no. Multiplication and division use the entire keyboard; numbers larger than five are entered directly, rather than broken up into smaller numbers like with addition and subtraction. In multiplication the user enters the larger of the two numbers being multiplied (the multiplicand) and, starting at the units column (it can be done in either order) presses the number into the keyboard that number of times corresponding to the units number of the multiplier. Then the user shifts the fingers so the same multiplicand number starts at the tens column and presses it in that number of times corresponding to the tens digit of the multiplier, etc.

For example, in the problem of 357 times 24, the 357 is held over the keyboard starting at the ones column and pressed in 4 times; then the fingers are shifted one column to the left and that same number is pressed in 2 times, for an answer of 8568. In practical use a three digit number times a two digit number can be done in about 3 seconds. I can't do it that fast on a modern calculator, no way.

I won't attempt to describe in words how division works, but suffice it to say that it's quick and easy. I plan on making a video about this soon, if you're interested; but in the meanwhile check the link above to the instruction manual for details.

I will say this: I've kept my Burroughs comptometer stored away to protect it from dust and because of its size, as it takes up a sizable footprint on my desk. But also, up till now I'd only known how to add and subtract, whereas I frequently have need for multiplication. Now I can see the possibility of using it for more practical purposes in my daily life, and that's exciting.



I've just received this book today and haven't yet delved into it, but there are lots of fun party tricks a person can do with the humble pocket calculator. I was inspired to get this book by a fond memory, from back in the 1970s, of a book called Games Calculators Play; back when these were new gadgets and I'd begun to amass a small calculator collection.



I'm really enjoying my Voss Modell 50 typewriter (used to type this piece), now that the imprint smudging and ribbon issues have been resolved. The smudging was caused by the carriage tripping right as the character was being printed, and required an adjustment to the escapement timing. These Voss typers have more adjustments than I've seen on many other machines, making it easy to resolve these kinds of problems. Also, the keyboard is a bit wider than many other medium sized portables, and there's ample clearance between the "A" key and the shift lock; touch-typing is therefore a breeze.

I was also enjoying typing on this vintage, slightly yellowed, notebook paper, which lends an immediate aged look to the piece. I need to find more of this old paper.

Stay well and do something creative!

Voss Modell 50

This machine was from John Lewis, our local typewriter shop. It was going to be used as a parts machine for repairing a newer Voss De Luxe owned by Kevin, but John managed to fix the De Luxe without robbing any parts off this older machine. John offered it to Kevin for a song, and now it's mine.

Mechanically this older Modell 50 and the newer De Luxe are very similar, they feature the same escapement mechanism for example (which, by the way, is replete with numerous adjustments), but the carriage on the De Luxe is different, especially around the paper bale. And of course the styling between the two models is different. This Modell 50 is rather masculine in appearance while the De Luxe is rounded and curvy. They also reversed the location of the back space and carriage release controls between the two models; Kevin's De Luxe was made in 1958, while my Modell 50 was made in 1952. And a sticker on the back of the De Luxe indicates it was marketed in the United States by a subsidiary of Voss, whereas on my older machine there's a paper sticker indicating Schultheis & Lenzen, Buromachinen, Koln-Aachener Str.15-17 (my apologies for not using the correct German punctuation marks.)

Aside from several cracked Bakelite panels and the hardened rubber parts, the only other issue is the springs for the paper bale are broken and missing, they are flat spring steel and only the ends remain where they were secured under mounting screws on either end of the bale. This type of spring steel can be brittle. My simple solution was to route a rubber band around from behind the right side of the carriage to the right front finger of the paper bale; it now gives plenty of pressure onto the paper.

Aside from needing more superficial polishing, I'm seriously thinking about making a ribbon cover. It won't have the same curvy shape as the original, but should be functional. It will be made from wood, and I hope to successfully seal and finish the wood into a glossy black appearance to match the rest of the machine.

There's an even earlier version of this machine, with round keys and a more conventional space bar. This is more of a hybrid machine, sporting a pre-WWII conservative appearance yet featuring modern plastic key caps.

This is one of those machines I didn't know I needed. In practical terms I don't need another typewriter; but now that it's mine, and I've put some work into it, I can say it's starting to feel like one of the family. It also has a stablemate cousin, the Triumph Norm 6 with a similar German/Hungarian keyboard. As I indicated in this piece, I have little problems typing with a QWERTZ keyboard, since I'm not a pure touch-typist on manual machines and therefore will periodically look at my fingers as I type, and make a mental note to be on the lookout for the letter "Y" so as to ensure I hit the correct key and not the "Z".