Headphones Megathread

07Lapierre

Deedsie wrote: »

I'm a driver and a cyclist and I very much like to know what is happening all around me in both modes of transport. Any unnecessary distractions are a bad idea... Yes including the radio in a car. The mirrors etc alleviate the risk somewhat.

Cycle lane network is so disjointed it would be impossible to do a city cycle without coming off the cycle lane for some of it. I like to hear buses approach when i am in the bus lane. Many earphone wearing cyclist have no idea what's about to overtake them.

It's common sense to not take the risk of wearing earphones while cycling. Unfortunately a lot of people lack that.

I'm a driver and a cyclist..the only time I ever listen to music/radio is when i'm driving or cycling. I LOVE really loud music when driving. I have an extra amp installed in the boot of my car and I upgraded the speakers too.

Synode

Deedsie wrote: »

I'm a driver and a cyclist and I very much like to know what is happening all around me in both modes of transport. Any unnecessary distractions are a bad idea... Yes including the radio in a car. The mirrors etc alleviate the risk somewhat.

Cycle lane network is so disjointed it would be impossible to do a city cycle without coming off the cycle lane for some of it. I like to hear buses approach when i am in the bus lane. Many earphone wearing cyclist have no idea what's about to overtake them.

It's common sense to not take the risk of wearing earphones while cycling. Unfortunately a lot of people lack that.

You sound like you're completely afraid of the world to me and you're in a tiny minority if you don't listen to a radio while driving a car. For reference, you can still hear a bus behind you while wearing headphones. Especially if it's going to overtake you. However, in most cases they don't have to because they're about to stop at the next stop to let passengers off/on. In the cases that they do need to overtake you, as long as you stay on a straight line and look before you veer off this line (i.e. be sensible) then there's zero risk of an accident while wearing headphones, bar the bus ploughing into you for no reason

Synode

tomasrojo wrote: »

I'm probably in the "makes a bit of a difference but not enough for me to care about other people doing it" camp.

I'm in the "It makes such a small difference that it's not a problem at all, no matter how much people try to blame cyclists doing something stupid on the fact they're wearing headphones" camp.

Deedsie

Synode wrote: »

You sound like you're completely afraid of the world to me and you're in a tiny minority if you don't listen to a radio while driving a car. For reference, you can still hear a bus behind you while wearing headphones. Especially if it's going to overtake you. However, in most cases they don't have to because they're about to stop at the next stop to let passengers off/on. In the cases that they do need to overtake you, as long as you stay on a straight line and look before you veer off this line (i.e. be sensible) then there's zero risk of an accident while wearing headphones, bar the bus ploughing into you for no reason

I'm a cautious cat for sure when it comes to cycling and driving. I share the road with other people, least I can do is behave as I would hope others would. Of course I listen to the radio when driving, but I wouldn't go down the noise pollution nuisance road. Being as observant as I can be when driving or cycling is important. We all have families to go home to in the evening.

Synode

Deedsie wrote: »

I'm a cautious cat for sure when it comes to cycling and driving. I share the road with other people, least I can do is behave as I would hope others would. Of course I listen to the radio when driving, but I wouldn't go down the noise pollution nuisance road. Being as observant as I can be when driving or cycling is important. We all have families to go home to in the evening.

I agree with your sentiment but honestly, listening to music while cycling is not an issue as long as you use common sense, follow the rules of the road and respect the people around you.

I do think it's pretty hypocritical to say you listen to music while driving while saying cyclists shouldn't listen to it while cycling. There's no squaring that circle

tomasrojo

Deedsie wrote: »

I'm a cautious cat for sure

Do you play bass?

doozerie

Deedsie wrote: »

Ya I would partially agree it's a bit hypocritical. I do my best to be as safe and observant as I can. Also I did say the earphones isn't the worst things cyclists do. I still think it's an unecessary distraction and I wouldn't support it.

Why automatically consider listening to music while cycling a distraction? Personally I find music most useful on the bike when I am commuting home after a stressful day at work, I find it exactly the opposite of distracting, it helps me stay focused on my surroundings by keeping me from drifting into a mental world of my own. Perhaps listening to music while cycling distracts you, we are all different after all, but it's a gross generalisation to assume it does the same for everyone.

I'm certain that there are people on bikes that are less attentive while wearing earphones, just like I'm certain there are people on bikes that are less attentive when they are tired, or when they are stressed about something in their life at that moment, or when they have a bug, etc. There are many sources of distractions and quite a few of them are external and therefore essentially beyond your control, whether it's a sickly fascinating hairy lower back on display in front of you, a particularly attractive pair of legs on display, a plank on a bike that promises to do something hilariously stupid at any moment, etc., etc. Most of those are far more distracting than music, in my opinion, should we ban them all? (Hairy exposed lower backs should be banned mind you, no question).

If you look you'll find many articles on the pros of cons of music in the workplace, including operating theatres. It's widely considered to be useful to aid concentration for repetitive task, for the hospital environment the stress reducing benefits get mentioned. Music doesn't work for everyone but the point is that it's not automatically a distraction for everyone either. If it were then, as mentioned many times already, radios in cars would be a major concern.

After all, a car is already full of things to distract your attention from the road - keeping an eye on your speedometer, checking which gear you are in, adjusting the air conditioning, fiddling with the windscreen wipers, checking whether you have all of your lights on so your car looks good (it's a thing, apparently), chatting to your passengers, fetching your child's favourite toy from the footwell they've dropped it into, ... While driving a car it takes a substantial and constant effort to remain focused on the road and those around you, if we are going to get worked up about distractions there is a lot more ammunition there to fuel an argument.

tomasrojo

doozerie wrote: »

While driving a car it takes a substantial and constant effort to remain focused on the road and those around you, if we are going to get worked up about distractions there is a lot more ammunition there to fuel an argument.

Yes, it is a curious fact that as people who by and large drive cars are more and more insistent that pedestrians and cyclists shouldn't listen to music while out and about, they themselves are in vehicles that are increasingly packed with distractions and increasingly designed to keep out all noise (mostly to exclude engine noise, I assume).

Yes, I know, airbags, seat belts, crumple zones, yada yada. But that's bully for you. Not so good for the pedestrian or cyclist injured because you couldn't hear them shouting for you to look out.

Anyway, I'm not suggesting anyone forgo listening to anything. I'm just bothered by a weird lack of equivalence: people who supposedly endanger themselves (risk undetermined, possibly small) are unacceptable, while people who arguably endanger others (risk undetermined, possibly small) are just normal.

magicbastarder

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2016/05/24/top-4-headphones-to-wear-while-driving/?utm_source=WWN_Facebook_Page&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=Social_Link&utm_content=Article

Roadhawk

http://dublinbikeblog.com/understanding/why-we-cant-always-blame-the-motorist/

All it takes is a split second.

Synode

Roadhawk wrote: »

http://dublinbikeblog.com/understanding/why-we-cant-always-blame-the-motorist/

All it takes is a split second.

And an idiot

traprunner

Roadhawk wrote: »

http://dublinbikeblog.com/understanding/why-we-cant-always-blame-the-motorist/

All it takes is a split second.

Yep, an idiot. They come in all walks of life unfortunately. Thankfully on a bike if they do something really stupid they are only really endangering themselves unlike in other modes of transport. Although if they kill themselves they won't have learned anything because they'll know no different.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/m50-motorists-shamed-with-shocking-footage-of-their-bad-behaviour-31132466.html

07Lapierre

I think Roadhawk is implying that the reason the cyclist didn't notice the van turning left was because, according to the article, the cyclist was listening to headphones.

Again I maintain that this is a "red herring". The cyclist was/is stupid and was not paying attention.

Synode

I once had a van try to cut across in front of me to turn left while I was in a cycle lane and clearly about to get to the turn before him. He jammed on once he realised he would have hit me. There's idiots in both cars/vans and on bikes. Listening to music has nothing to do with it

magicbastarder

Roadhawk wrote: »

http://dublinbikeblog.com/understanding/why-we-cant-always-blame-the-motorist/

All it takes is a split second.

took his phone out from his trouser pocket, and started fiddling with it

so what is it about the post that makes this about headphones?
the motorist was in front of the cyclist. this has nothing to do with the cyclist being able to use his ears to sense danger.

yannakis

Roadhawk wrote: »

http://dublinbikeblog.com/understanding/why-we-cant-always-blame-the-motorist/

All it takes is a split second.

Good example of an idiot outsourcing responsibility of his own life.

And the frustrating part is that if this scenario went ****bound, the only one to blame would be the driver.

Roadhawk

magicbastarder wrote: »

so what is it about the post that makes this about headphones?
the motorist was in front of the cyclist. this has nothing to do with the cyclist being able to use his ears to sense danger.

Yes thats great to be selective with quoting an article (selective bias)...

Another quote:
"as he was also wearing earphones – completely unaware of the danger he was in."

07Lapierre

Roadhawk wrote: »

Yes thats great to be selective with quoting an article (selective bias)...

Another quote:
"as he was also wearing earphones cycling while using his mobile phone – completely unaware of the danger he was in."

or Cycling while waving at his mate who was shouting at him from a nearby shop - completely unaware of the danger he was in.

or Cycling while looking down at his nice new shoes - completely unaware of the danger he was in.

or a 100 other possible distractions while cycling - completely unaware of the danger he was in.

take your pick... bottom line is.. the cyclist should have been LOOKING ahead and should have anticipated the van turning left. He should also have left his phone in his pocket.

magicbastarder

Roadhawk wrote: »

Yes thats great to be selective with quoting an article (selective bias)...

Another quote:
"as he was also wearing earphones – completely unaware of the danger he was in."

he may have also been wearing ugly socks, completely unaware of the danger he was is.

i won't insult your intelligence by explaining the difference between correlation and causation.

doozerie

Roadhawk wrote: »

Another quote:
"as he was also wearing earphones – completely unaware of the danger he was in."

Based on the article he either didn't spot or chose to ignore a van ahead of him that was signalling a turn left. I suggest that this person on a bike is beyond help, earphones are the least of his issues.

You can choose to believe that the root cause of his behaviour was the earphones, but that doesn't make it true.

Dr. Mantis Toboggan

I was stopped at lights the other day beside another cyclist who had earphones in. Is it a unsafe to have them in when cycling? I used to, prior to moving to Dublin, but now in the city i prefer to have all my faculties about me as i get used to traffic and all other hazards.

Tombo2001

Dr. Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

I was stopped at lights the other day beside another cyclist who had earphones in. Is it a unsafe to have them in when cycling? I used to, prior to moving to Dublin, but now in the city i prefer to have all my faculties about me as i get used to traffic and all other hazards.

On the face of it I would agree with you; but it also risks being one another of those double standards applied to cyclists.

Motorists have no problem driving around with the radio on. I know for example I would find it difficult to read and listen to the radio at the same time. So am I happy to give less attention to driving, or to cycling, than I would to reading......not really.

Thats the way its gone with the hi viz - I dont see any flourescent yellow cars out there, but all of a sudden motorists are seeing black clad cyclists everywhere the look and they need to tell the world.

And I wont even go there on the mobile phones.......

Lambay island

Dr. Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

I was stopped at lights the other day beside another cyclist who had earphones in. Is it a unsafe to have them in when cycling? I used to, prior to moving to Dublin, but now in the city i prefer to have all my faculties about me as i get used to traffic and all other hazards.

I don't use them myself but i know a few people who do and they tend to disable one side, generally right side so they can hear traffic also. Personally i think the shoulder check and constant looking is more vital as I'm sure there's deaf people who cycle too.

Danjamin1

Tombo2001 wrote: »

On the face of it I would agree with you; but it also risks being one another of those double standards applied to cyclists.

Motorists have no problem driving around with the radio on. I know for example I would find it difficult to read and listen to the radio at the same time. So am I happy to give less attention to driving, or to cycling, than I would to reading......not really.

Thats the way its gone with the hi viz - I dont see any flourescent yellow cars out there, but all of a sudden motorists are seeing black clad cyclists everywhere the look and they need to tell the world.

And I wont even go there on the mobile phones.......

It really depends on what you listen to, I listen to podcasts when I cycle & it acts more as ambient noise than anything else. I don't find my awareness of surroundings is greatly diminished by having my earbuds in.

In saying that, I wouldn't blare music or cycle with over-ear headphones on as they tend to drown out everything around you.

Dr. Mantis Toboggan

Tombo2001 wrote: »

On the face of it I would agree with you; but it also risks being one another of those double standards applied to cyclists.

Motorists have no problem driving around with the radio on. I know for example I would find it difficult to read and listen to the radio at the same time. So am I happy to give less attention to driving, or to cycling, than I would to reading......not really.

Thats the way its gone with the hi viz - I dont see any flourescent yellow cars out there, but all of a sudden motorists are seeing black clad cyclists everywhere the look and they need to tell the world.

And I wont even go there on the mobile phones.......

True enough, speaking strictly from a cyclists point of view though, on a quiet country road it's easy hear any approaching traffic over whatever you're listening to. I tried it in the city however and didn't like it. Too much ambient noise.

Cycling when it is dark particularly, really puts the sh1ts up me, even though i do it every second day (bar this week because of the crap weather).

Tombo2001

Danjamin1 wrote: »

It really depends on what you listen to, I listen to podcasts when I cycle & it acts more as ambient noise than anything else. I don't find my awareness of surroundings is greatly diminished by having my earbuds in.

In saying that, I wouldn't blare music or cycle with over-ear headphones on as they tend to drown out everything around you.

Its something I've thought a bit about recently, more in relation to my own driving as I dont use them on the bike.

Its not that you cant concentrate with the radio on; but I think that you can concentrate better without it. You can take more in as regards whats on the road around you. Just a view.

Tombo2001

Lambay island wrote: »

I don't use them myself but i know a few people who do and they tend to disable one side, generally right side so they can hear traffic also. Personally i think the shoulder check and constant looking is more vital as I'm sure there's deaf people who cycle too.

This is something I do, almost to excess.

For example this morning, in the dark/ wet - every time a car is overtaking me I'm looking back, checking.

While I'm pretty sure it influences driver behaviour, a fear I would have is that someday I'll be doing the shoulder check and I'll hit a pothole, or that someone opens a car door and I dont see it in time.....

mr spuckler

Tombo2001 wrote: »

a fear I would have is that someday I'll be doing the shoulder check and I'll hit a pothole, or that someone opens a car door and I dont see it in time.....

this happened to me years ago when karting, looked over my shoulder to check who was behind me and as i was turning around i smashed into a guy who had spun in front of me. ever since then i occasionally get paranoid when looking over my shoulder on the bike as a result!

on earphones - i find they make next to no difference to me. i always look before making any move in traffic regardless. that said i don't wear them much but that's more because i can't be bothered.

RayCun

This is something that always comes up in the running forum, people wearing headphones in races.

Everyone wearing headphones says that they have it turned down low, are completely aware of all their surroundings, etc etc.

While everyone else's experience is that headphone wearers don't hear motorbikes, don't hear ambulances, don't hear stewards, don't hear other runners coming up behind them...

jive

I think I'm safer with headphones on because hearing a bus or something not far behind my back wheel gives me the willies. With headphones you still hear it but it dulls the sound so it doesn't feel like you're on the frontline.

I can see arguments for and against, you really shouldn't be relying on hearing to make any decisions on the bike though. Been done to death on here before and there's 2 legitimate schools of thought.