Headphones for cycling

big mce

Hi All,

Can any one recommend good quality headphones with a long cable for use while cycling. Every pair I have don't have a long enough cable to allow me to have my ipod in my back jersey and route the cable to my ears.

Ta

ednwireland

don't cycle with headphones, best advice I can give you

el Bastardo

Unless you've a very long back, routing any headphones down your back should work.

manafana

i wouldnt put earphones in both ears, i just put one in my inside ear so still aware of traffic coming from behind.

big mce

Sorry folks but I've yet to meet a car when out on my mountain bike in ballyhoura, ballinastoe and some other unofficial places.:D

poochiem

i've always used philips earphones, they are the over ear ones and if youre off road i'd use the in-ear ones... in traffic I use these kind

you'll pick em up for 10 to 20 euro, cheap enough not to worry about them getting wet and having to replace once or twice a year etc. long enough to thread through your jersey

nomadic

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sennheiser-Eco-Ear-Canal-Headphones/dp/B000S8EUNM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1287268803&sr=8-2

I like them. Good but fairly cheap if you break them.

I must say the one time I never listen to music on the bike is when mountainbiking. Its nice to enjoy the peacefulness of the great outdoors.

zil

I'm a fan of these guys for any sort of exercise

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/water-resistant-sport-headphones-jogging-sport-line_502539

Decent sound quality, waterproof and nearly impossible for them to fall out of your ear.

big mce

Thanks lads for all the suggestions, now just to make up my mind which set!

seamus

Win.
Had these about 3 weeks now. Main benefit is that you have no big cable running down your back, pulling on your ears. But it also connects to your phone, so you can switch between radio or MP3 at will and also take calls.

If your iPod doesn't have bluetooth though they're no use to you.

droidus

These are my favourite ever commuter headphones. Cheap, cheerful and foldable and they still let some sound in. Standard in-ear ones always seem to fall out on me, especially when im checking over the shoulder when cycling.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sony-MDRW08L...5007593&sr=8-1

markcroninbsc

i think you can get headphone cable extensions? i used to have something like this anyway that i got free with phone headphones

munsterleinster

I've Seinheiser CX300 but found the cable is very rubbery so sticks to your skin when you sweat and will pop the ear buds out. Fantastic sound quality though.

Best combo I use with the iphone on the bike is to get:
Sony HPM-70 (about £3 delivered from ebay). Throw away the lower part for the phone and keep the earphones with the short cable. The quality is nearly as good as the fanstastic Seinheisers but much cheaper and the longer arm on the earbud is better at keeping them in your ear.

Then connect to a remote for the iphone. I got a fancy Belkin one but you can get one from ebay for about £3.99 delivered. (ebay: 140459208384)
This will allow you to skip tracks and change volume with the clip attached to your collar / camelback strap / zip.

I'm 6'2+ and works great with phone in back pocket. Bring freezer bag incase of rain and at the price for the stuff above, don't really care if it gets rained on anyway.

ednwireland wrote: »

don't cycle with headphones, best advice I can give you

:rolleyes:
If the lad want's to stick his mickey in a food blender and asks for advice on the best blender for the job either answer his question or crawl back into your little health and safety bubble.
Give me one example of one incident of anyone getting harmed by wearing headphones on a bike.....

Canis Lupus

I use a standard pair of inner ear Seinheissers.

cdaly_

I use a pair of Sennheiser CX300 in-ear phones. Lovely sound, cuts all that wind whistle but does reduce the amount I can hear around me. I've not found that to be a problem tho.

Nice long cable, I usually have 30% of it coiled up...

sham2

I've used the Etymotic Er6i in ear phones in Ballyhoura attached to my iPhone in the special pocket in the lower back pocket of my MTB jersey. Plenty of length in the cable and I'm 6' 2". Cable runs in through a special hole in the jersey up my back.
Have since replaced with Etymotic hf2. €145 in the Apple stores. €90 on ebay.
Sound quality is a priority to me so hence the outlay.

http://www.etymotic.com/ephp/hf2.html

Also, would not dream of using headphones out on the road in a million years.

ThisRegard

munsterleinster wrote: »

Give me one example of one incident of anyone getting harmed by wearing headphones on a bike.....

Here's one to start you off with

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/headphone-danger-warning-after-cyclist-using-ipod-hit-by-tram-20100616-yfcc.html

eoferrall

ThisRegard wrote: »

Here's one to start you off with

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/headphone-danger-warning-after-cyclist-using-ipod-hit-by-tram-20100616-yfcc.html

More than just the ipod at fault there... it would have happened with Ipod probably as the ipod doesn't stop him looking around and seeing a tram (which is pretty big.

once you can hear traffic it's fine, same as having a radio on in car/motorbike.

ThisRegard

It was an incident where someone got harmed while wearing headphones while on a bike wasn't it, that's what was asked for

Oldlegs

"The warning comes after a 45-year-old man cycled into the path of a tram while listening to his iPod in Melbourne’s south today."

If he can't concentrate when cycling would suggest that he doesn't bother with cycling, much less cycling with/without headphones.:p

A long spin back up the N11, for example, can be pretty mind numbing. A solo trip over Wicklow Gap/Sally Gap/<fill in your own fav hill> can be greatly enhanced by some tunes to keep you going.

That said, I always work on the assumption that the person in the car is likely to do the most stupid thing at the worst time. Most of the time I am wrong, but when I am right I am VERY right.

Lumen

Whilst the absence of loud music doesn't enable you to see the oncoming tram, it does allow you to hear the onlookers shouting "TRAM!" at you.

seamus

On my commute I listen to talk radio. I can hear the traffic around me perfectly well, it's really no worse than having someone talking beside you. I find that I tend to click in and out of the radio fairly constantly, half the time I've gone ten minutes before I realise that I've no idea what they were talking about, I was just vaguely aware of some background noise in my ears.

When I ride without earphones I find that I tend to suffer from information overload, though that may just be a matter of adjustment. I find it easier to ride with the earphones in and not switched on than without them at all as it deadens the sounds of the outside world and I'm less likely to jump when a truck door slams or goes over a big pothole.

On a spin, I'll have music in my ears, but again low enough that I can hear everything around me.

I would strongly recommend against any kind of noise cancelling or noise isolation earphones. Audiophilia aside, it's always useful to be able to hear what's going on.

DirkVoodoo

I find wind noise can be more deafening than an ipod, especially at this time of the year.

If you can't look around you and function without relying on your hearing then maybe it's time to stop cycling.

An ipod on a low enough volume for the conditions isn't really a big deal, let's stop painting it as a death sentence here.

fenris

It is obvious that if he was wearing his helmet the tram driver would have seen him and swerved to avoid the cyclist.

I use Klipsch S4i in one ear when out and about, volume control, mic, apple do everything button and the oval shaped earpieces are really comfy and stay in place so that I still have my favorite tunes on impact.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Klipsch-S4i-Headphones-built-Compatible/dp/B00264GYMG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1287404829&sr=8-1




The Klipsch S2m are similar but do not have a volume control as are cheaper



http://www.amazon.co.uk/Klipsch-S2m-Noise-Isolating-Microphone-Single-Button/dp/B002FB7IWU/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=computers&qid=1287404829&sr=8-8

Lemag

fenris wrote: »

It is obvious that if he was wearing his helmet the tram driver would have seen him and swerved to avoid the cyclist.

Can trams swerve

rubadub

Lemag wrote: »

Can trams swerve

I find myself looking around a lot more with earphones, in some ways it could make some people cycle safer.

Lumen

rubadub wrote: »

I find myself looking around a lot more with earphones, in some ways it could make some people cycle safer.

I find myself taking a lot more care when driving drunk, in some ways alcohol could make some people drive safer.

eoferrall

Lumen wrote: »

I find myself taking a lot more care when driving drunk, in some ways alcohol could make some people drive safer.

Yes because having music on in the background is the same as getting in a car drunk and driving... terrible analogy & totally irrelevant.

DirkVoodoo

Lumen wrote: »

I find myself taking a lot more care when driving drunk, in some ways alcohol could make some people drive safer.

Is that really a fair comparison? Does riding with ear phones affect your reaction times now? I can honestly say that I have the same reactions with or without headphones, when I make a mistake it's nearly always down to not looking around me first. I can't hear very well at the best of times though, which might explain it.

eoferrall

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Is that really a fair comparison? Does riding with ear phones affect your reaction times now? I can honestly say that I have the same reactions with or without headphones, when I make a mistake it's nearly always down to not looking around me first. I can't hear very well at the best of times though, which might explain it.

Or impair judgement and all the other effects of alcohol on the body!

seamus

I find that sexy women are a much greater hazard, far more distracting than earphones.

Maybe we should ban sexy women?

Lumen

eoferrall wrote: »

Yes because having music on in the background is the same as getting in a car drunk and driving... terrible analogy & totally irrelevant.

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Is that really a fair comparison? Does riding with ear phones affect your reaction times now?

eoferrall wrote: »

Or impair judgement and all the other effects of alcohol on the body!

Do I really need to explain the analogy? I thought it was obvious enough. Come on.

Canis Lupus

seamus wrote: »

I find that sexy women are a much greater hazard, far more distracting than earphones.

Maybe we should ban sexy women?

F*ck totally. All my near misses involve taking my eyes off the road to look at some woman. It's something I need to work on.

Almost went into a parked car the other morning. She'd no right to be walking about with a skirt that short and legs that beautiful at that hour.

petethedrummer

Whether its safe or not depends on what type of bike you ride. Riding fixed nullifies the effect of alcohol and probably also enhances hearing, so you may not be 100% sure of death.

DirkVoodoo

Lumen wrote: »

Do I really need to explain the analogy? I thought it was obvious enough. Come on.

I'm sorry, I really don't get it, you can't just substitute alcohol and headphones and expect a similar comparison between drink driving and cycling with headphones.

Tell you what, if I ever end up ploughing through someone's bedroom because I had my headphones on, I'll buy you a coke.

Nietzschean

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I'm sorry, I really don't get it, you can't just substitute alcohol and headphones and expect a similar comparison between drink driving and cycling with headphones.

I think Lumen was more poking fun at the comment that wearing headphones could somehow make you a safer cyclist, in which case his analogy makes perfect sense

Lumen

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I'm sorry, I really don't get it, you can't just substitute alcohol and headphones and expect a similar comparison between drink driving and cycling with headphones.

Tell you what, if I ever end up ploughing through someone's bedroom because I had my headphones on, I'll buy you a coke.

OK, the point is..

Being deaf makes cycling more hazardous, since you're eliminating a useful sense. You can compensate for this in various ways, e.g. by paying more attention and going slower.

Being inebriated/talking/eating while driving makes driving more hazardous, for various well-documented reasons. You can compensate for this in various ways, e.g. by paying more attention and going slower.

This sort of compensatory approach is not recognised by ROTR/traffic law. You're supposed to be using all of your available faculties and paying maximum attention at all times, not deliberately and unnecessarily screwing some of them up then compensating.

DirkVoodoo

Lumen wrote: »

OK, the point is..

Being deaf makes cycling more hazardous, since you're eliminating a useful sense. You can compensate for this in various ways, e.g. by paying more attention and going slower.

Being inebriated/talking/eating while driving makes driving more hazardous, for various well-documented reasons. You can compensate for this in various ways, e.g. by paying more attention and going slower.

This sort of compensatory approach is not recognised by ROTR/traffic law. You're supposed to be using all of your available faculties and paying maximum attention at all times, not deliberately and unnecessarily screwing some of them up then compensating.

I don't find headphones make it any harder to hear, like I said before wind noise is enough to do that unless you happen to be going very slowly. Plus no one was saying to have a "deafening" level of volume, like Seamus said a low level through headphones is no more obscuring to your hearing than holding a conversation with a cyclist beside you.

It must just be me so...

Lumen

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I don't find headphones make it any harder to hear, like I said before wind noise is enough to do that unless you happen to be going very slowly. Plus no one was saying to have a "deafening" level of volume, like Seamus said a low level through headphones is no more obscuring to your hearing than holding a conversation with a cyclist beside you.

It must just be me so...

I was responding to this:

rubadub wrote: »

I find myself looking around a lot more with earphones, in some ways it could make some people cycle safer.

I don't know about you, but if a given cyclist is looking around a lot more when listening to music, that person is doing so because their hearing is compromised, and they cannot therefore argue that their hearing is not compromised, or else they'd have no reason to look around a lot more.

km991148

since the thread is totally off topic from the OP..

Anyone noticed the amount of motorists wearing headphones while driving these days? I know its probably the same as cycling/walking with earphones or driving with load music... but it still doesnt look right whenever I see it!

DirkVoodoo

What's wrong with looking around more? I mean, in terms of importance for cycling, not all your senses are equal, I would have thought being able to see is far more important than being able to hear.

You obviously think differently, I don't think we are going to agree on this, but in the extreme I see people with headphones on who never seem to look around or have any awareness. I don't see what is wrong with listening to music and making up for any possible loss in awareness by looking around you more often. You're right, it doesn't make you safer and I don't agree it does, but I also don't agree that it is as dangerous as people make out because of a few freak accidents involving ipods (where it was not made clear if the ipod was the sole factor for the incident or just a severe case of stupidity).

I'll leave it at that, that's pretty much all I have to say on it. I cycle a lot around town with headphones and I am entirely interested in self-preservation. If I ever felt that headphones were on a par with no lights or alcohol (I did learn this last christmas, that was swiftly cut back on) I would stop immediately. I wear little i-pod buds, they are tinny and even the max volume is quite low, but I always have it at a level that enables me to hear traffic. Again, wind noise is more of a problem for me, half the time I can't hear anything but wind whooshing past my head, maybe it's the shape of my ears or something.

eoferrall

Lumen wrote: »

OK, the point is..

Being deaf makes cycling more hazardous, since you're eliminating a useful sense. You can compensate for this in various ways, e.g. by paying more attention and going slower.

Being inebriated/talking/eating while driving makes driving more hazardous, for various well-documented reasons. You can compensate for this in various ways, e.g. by paying more attention and going slower.

This sort of compensatory approach is not recognised by ROTR/traffic law. You're supposed to be using all of your available faculties and paying maximum attention at all times, not deliberately and unnecessarily screwing some of them up then compensating.

I'm sorry but it's still stretching it, yes some MAY do something stupid while listening to earphones whether walking cycling doing anything. this is more to do with the person not paying attention, also if you are cycling (or walking) with the earphones are so loud you can't hear a car beeping etc then you are damaging your ears in addition to being a fool!

The drunk anology just doesnt link to me, when you are drunk it is not "just taking away one sense" that you can compensate for by going slower, you lose rational decision making, less control of limbs vision impairment along with hearing impairment, yes drinking impairs your hearing also (true fact!)

While I see what you are saying to me it is stretching it to ridiculous levels, imo a more useful anology is when a driver driving with the side mirrors tucked in (which a lot do and when I cycle past I am always tempted to pop them out and give them a look!)

Jumpy

I have always used headphones. Whether they are attached to a music device or not. Wind in my ears gives me headaches for some odd reason. Must be all the empty space.
Headphones makes it easier for me to hear cars without the wind rush noise.

DirkVoodoo

Jumpy wrote: »

I have always used headphones. Whether they are attached to a music device or not. Wind in my ears gives me headaches for some odd reason. Must be all the empty space.
Headphones makes it easier for me to hear cars without the wind rush noise.

Maybe we should form our own support group, Lumen clearly doesn't have much sympathy for cyclists afflicted by our condition.

seamus

The wind rush noise is actually sound of the wind catching on your ear and in your earhole. If you turn your ear towards the wind, the noise goes away.

Somewhat conversely to common sense, covering your ear with a light piece of cloth (like a skull cap) will prevent any sound of the wind and make it easier to hear when you're on the bike.

DirkVoodoo

seamus wrote: »

The wind rush noise is actually sound of the wind catching on your ear and in your earhole. If you turn your ear towards the wind, the noise goes away.

Somewhat conversely to common sense, covering your ear with a light piece of cloth (like a skull cap) will prevent any sound of the wind and make it easier to hear when you're on the bike.

Hats mess up my hair...common sense stops right there.

rubadub

Lumen wrote: »

OK, the point is..

Being deaf makes cycling more hazardous, since you're eliminating a useful sense. You can compensate for this in various ways, e.g. by paying more attention and going slower.

And my point is some people could overcompensate so much that they are in effect less likely to be in an accident. Same sort of theory with helmets, where a kid could be more reckless because they think they are invincible. I imagine deaf cyclists would be very cautious.

Lumen wrote: »

This sort of compensatory approach is not recognised by ROTR/traffic law. You're supposed to be using all of your available faculties and paying maximum attention at all times, not deliberately and unnecessarily screwing some of them up then compensating.

So music should be out in cars too? no chatting from passengers, maybe ban high heels.
This is from the ROTR
http://www.rotr.ie/your-licence-and-vehicle/vehicle-safety/other-responsibilities.html

Personal entertainment systems

As a road user, you should avoid using personal entertainment systems through earphones. These systems, for example personal radios and MP3 players, can distract you, and may prove dangerous when driving or crossing the road. Cyclists in particular should avoid these systems, as they rely on their hearing while on the road.

If you do use a personal or in-car system, play it at a volume that does not distract or prevent you from hearing emergency sirens or car horns.

Not sure why cyclists are singled out in particular, deaf people are allowed drive/cycle/walk, I would have thought hearing as important for all those modes of transport. Mine is never at a level where I cannot hear sirens & horns.

Some other advice

Walking beside or along the road

* If there is a footpath you must use it.
* If there is no footpath, you must walk as near as possible to the righthand side of the road (facing oncoming traffic).
* Do not walk more than two abreast. If the road is narrow or carries heavy traffic, you should walk in single file.
* You should always wear reflective clothing at night when walking outside built-up areas.
* You should always carry a torch when walking at night time.
* You should always be aware of other road users.

I hope you all have your torches!

Lumen wrote: »

I don't know about you, but if a given cyclist is looking around a lot more when listening to music, that person is doing so because their hearing is compromised, and they cannot therefore argue that their hearing is not compromised, or else they'd have no reason to look around a lot more.

My hearing is compromised, and I feel I overcompensate because of it. At times I have looked around and seen things I would never have heard, i.e. I would not have ordinarily spotted the danger. It has also lead to me looking around a bit more without them, as I realise it is not as beneficial a sense as some might think it is.

Though the thread has gone walking to a whole different matter; I would highly recommend these earphones;


http://www.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/5348846/Trail/searchtext%3ESONY+EARPHONES.htm



They're class. There is a litte rubber piece that sits inside you ear, and that can be a little annoying and hurt a small bit when yuo first start wearing them, but you quickly get used to them.

I originally purchased them to just wear in the gym, as I have a pair of Sennheiser HD515's that I used to use to walk around with, but the Sony ones are now practically the only headphones I use (HD515's get used for music on the PC these days, but that's about all).

The sound quality is brilliant. Surprisingly bassy and they don't seem to distort too much, even at higher levels of volume. Excellent sound for €21, and although the cable is fairly short, you get an extender with it, so it's grand. You can wear them with the extension cable, and have the MP3 player in your pants pocket, and the wire will still dangle about a bit, so you've plenty to play with.

Nietzschean

rubadub wrote: »

And my point is some people could overcompensate so much that they are in effect less likely to be in an accident. Same sort of theory with helmets, where a kid could be more reckless because they think they are invincible. I imagine deaf cyclists would be very cautious.

That logic could be exactly applied to drunk cycling/driving.


I imagine cyclists claiming to look around more because of earphones is probably something of a misleading notion anyway, i'd say they do for 10minutes, then they go back to whatever they always do.*


*that said, i quite happily go around town/elsewhere wearing headphones on what I believe to be a safe level for me(can hear stuff). I wouldn't claim its safer than cycling without them, probably SafetyLevel(without) - e where e is small enough not to bother me....

youcancallmeal

This topic comes up every few months in this forum and the result is always the same, some for and some against and then we all get on with our lives

Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
Example 4 (Starts off sensible but argument still arises)