Headphones Megathread

ridelikeaturtle

magicbastarder wrote: »

maybe at root my issue is that it's another example of the idea that the group which creates the danger, is not expected to conform to the same behavioural checks as the group which suffers from it.
why are we talking about the vulnerable road user being the one who should not impair their hearing, rather than the road user who creates the danger who should not impair their hearing?

These are two very separate issues: 1) the burden of reducing the likelihood of a collision onto who is vulnerable (cyclist & pedestrian) and who is not (car/truck/van); and 2) who is likely to not react to external auditory stimuli (headphone or earbud wearer, irrelevant of what mode of transport).

To me, it's a "no-brainer": no road users should use headphones or earbuds. IF you are a vulnerable road user, it would be smart to not do something that's going to increase your chance of a collision; conversely, smart to do things that reduce your chance of a collision (be as aware as possible, use lights, high-vis clothing, etc).

And on what "increases" that, or not, by how much, or at all, etc., we can have debate .

Idleater

ridelikeaturtle wrote: »

it would be smart to not do something that's going to increase your chance of a collision.

I'm just curious about how wearing headphones increases these chances?

Your post is very close to victim (or vulnerable person) blaming.

Grassey

ridelikeaturtle wrote:

To me, it's a "no-brainer": no road users should use headphones or earbuds. IF you are a vulnerable road user, it would be smart to not do something that's going to increase your chance of a collision; conversely, smart to do things that reduce your chance of a collision (be as aware as possible, use lights, high-vis clothing, etc).

To me it's a no brainer that if you are more likey to be the collisioner not the colissionee then the smart thing to do would be to reduce chances of that by using dipped headlights 24/7, using indicators, turning off radio & phones, high vis paint on bumpers etc etc

AndrewJRenko

ridelikeaturtle wrote: »

These are two very separate issues: 1) the burden of reducing the likelihood of a collision onto who is vulnerable (cyclist & pedestrian) and who is not (car/truck/van); and 2) who is likely to not react to external auditory stimuli (headphone or earbud wearer, irrelevant of what mode of transport).

To me, it's a "no-brainer": no road users should use headphones or earbuds. IF you are a vulnerable road user, it would be smart to not do something that's going to increase your chance of a collision; conversely, smart to do things that reduce your chance of a collision (be as aware as possible, use lights, high-vis clothing, etc).

And on what "increases" that, or not, by how much, or at all, etc., we can have debate .

What colour is your car? Because if it's not hi-vis green with reflective stripes (you know, things that reduce your chances of a collision), it is hard to take your advice seriously.


Is it just that you expect other people to do these safety things, not yourself?

ridelikeaturtle

Some people's level of acceptable risk is higher than others. YMMV (literally).

ridelikeaturtle

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What colour is your car? Because if it's not hi-vis green with reflective stripes (you know, things that reduce your chances of a collision), it is hard to take your advice seriously.


Is it just that you expect other people to do these safety things, not yourself?

"Straw Man" Watchdog: WOOF WOOF WOOF

tomasrojo

Grassey wrote: »

To me it's a no brainer that if you are more likey to be the collisioner not the colissionee then the smart thing to do would be to reduce chances of that by using dipped headlights 24/7, using indicators, turning off radio & phones, high vis paint on bumpers etc etc

It's amazing that there's a move towards touch pads for car controls now (you can't operate them without taking your eyes off the road), and Elon Musk is even talking about embedding Easter eggs and "super fun" games.

Weepsie

ridelikeaturtle wrote: »

Some people's level of acceptable risk is higher than others. YMMV (literally).

Nope, it's just that you're wrong here

This is probably the best relevant research. It cites a Dutch study about the dangers of headphone wearing, however that study was in a fairly controlled environment and didn't allow for visual senses and how they can compensate.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bjsm/2016/12/22/listen-music-earphones-whilst-cycling/

AndrewJRenko

ridelikeaturtle wrote: »

Some people's level of acceptable risk is higher than others. YMMV (literally).

Feel free to clarify why all the "smart things" are apparently to be done by cyclists, and not by the people who are doing the actual damage?

ridelikeaturtle

Weepsie wrote: »

Nope, it's just that you're wrong here

This is probably the best relevant research. It cites a Dutch study about the dangers of headphone wearing, however that study was in a fairly controlled environment and didn't allow for visual senses and how they can compensate.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bjsm/2016/12/22/listen-music-earphones-whilst-cycling/

In the face of evidence contrary to my beliefs, I will concede that I am forced to re-evaluate my position. Well done. :eek:

It's a great point, regarding cyclists who are deaf: how does this affect safety? So you have yet another group to go with those who can hear, and those who are listening to something on headphones/earbuds: those who cannot hear anything at all. (You could even add "greatly diminished" hearing, by some objective measure.)

I'd like to see more research done here. It seems incredibly counter-intuitive that cycling while listening to something (a "distraction") doesn't affect cycling ability and safety. Then again... SCIENCE.

Danjamin1

ridelikeaturtle wrote: »

In the face of evidence contrary to my beliefs, I will concede that I am forced to re-evaluate my position. Well done. :eek:

It's a great point, regarding cyclists who are deaf: how does this affect safety? So you have yet another group to go with those who can hear, and those who are listening to something on headphones/earbuds: those who cannot hear anything at all. (You could even add "greatly diminished" hearing, by some objective measure.)

I'd like to see more research done here. It seems incredibly counter-intuitive that cycling while listening to something (a "distraction") doesn't affect cycling ability and safety. Then again... SCIENCE.

Out of curiosity have you just gone out & tried it yourself? Probably the best way to gauge how you feel about it. I'm not too concerned about the results of any of the studies available as I'm comfortable that I can hear what I need to hear from my surroundings and the podcast I listen to is not too distracting. I wouldn't listen to music while I cycle personally but that's just my own preference.

ridelikeaturtle

Danjamin1 wrote: »

Out of curiosity have you just gone out & tried it yourself? Probably the best way to gauge how you feel about it. I'm not too concerned about the results of any of the studies available as I'm comfortable that I can hear what I need to hear from my surroundings and the podcast I listen to is not too distracting. I wouldn't listen to music while I cycle personally but that's just my own preference.

I tried once years ago to add speakers to my motorcycle helmet (designed for this purpose), to be able to hear route directions from a satnav - and I hated it, I found it distracting. (I turn off this "feature" in my car as well, I find having the car's sat nav telling me to do stuff is distracting.)

Grassey

ridelikeaturtle wrote: »

I tried once years ago to add speakers to my motorcycle helmet (designed for this purpose), to be able to hear route directions from a satnav - and I hated it, I found it distracting. (I turn off this "feature" in my car as well, I find having the car's sat nav telling me to do stuff is distracting.)

Can you tell me how to disable the wife module?

Danjamin1

ridelikeaturtle wrote: »

I tried once years ago to add speakers to my motorcycle helmet (designed for this purpose), to be able to hear route directions from a satnav - and I hated it, I found it distracting. (I turn off this "feature" in my car as well, I find having the car's sat nav telling me to do stuff is distracting.)

Fair enough, but that's very different to earbuds when cycling. A car & motorcycle helmet are enclosed and insulated, that's not the case when you're on a bicycle. I find it's really not as distracting as you're suggesting.

Grassey

I was reading a thread earlier that for some reason reminded me of this thread.

Jedi_Archivist wrote: »

I should just clarify for people; when I hit the lorry I definitely didn't feel any impact. There probably was a noise, but I'm partly deaf and had the radio on a loud volume as a result. So I couldn't have heard it.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057908857

07Lapierre

Grassey wrote: »

I was reading a thread earlier that for some reason reminded me of this thread.



https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057908857

Even if the car driver had heard the scraping noise...that would not have prevented the incident? The car driver was driving,while listening to a loud radio right? So what? they could SEE the truck, the truck driver could SEE the car? The car driver made a foolish decision to try and pass the truck and failed. I fail to see the relevance ohearing or not hearing the scraping noise. Anyway, the advise given was correct..contact the truck company.

Grassey

I was more alluding to discussion on previous pages here where those cyclists with earphones are maniacs depriving themselves of a sensory organ, while drivers clearly don't have that problem because radios and sound insulated cars don't impede drivers hearing etc etc.

(not the actual incident of hitting another vehicle, driving off and now wondering what is the correct course of action)

07Lapierre

Ah I getcha!

Besides...if the car driver had been riding a bike...

1. There would have been plenty of room to pass the truck.
2. If they did hit the truck (even while wearing headphones) they would certainly have felt it and possibly tasted it it too!

Mc Love

Used to have a radio on the bike, it even had a horn and light built in. Great little yoke

clod71

yannakis wrote: »

Personally I am both a cyclist and a driver. As a driver, I came across many cyclists wearing headphones (listening to music) who have no idea that a car is approaching.

Let me hear your opinions on this matter..

I think a waterproof bluetooth speaker taped onto the bar should resolve the problem...

AmberGold

While I was never an advocate of using headphones while cycling I picked up a set of these recently.

https://www.plantronics.com/hk/en/product/backbeat-fit-3100

Using "Always Aware Eartips" they don't actually sit in the ear canal but on the outside of the canal and channel sound in. You can hear cars coming from behind perfectly and IMO theres not much difference between wearing these and none at all.

I do notice when in heavy traffic theres so much sound coming in from outside that the music becomes background noise. For me they work better on rides in the countryside.

For those of you who wear over ear or in ear audio while cycling they're worth a look.

Obviously the safest option is none at all.

ED E

Same as Aftershokz. Personally I much prefer a good seal on the left ear and nothing on the right.

Thinkingaboutit

Something for a wholly and nearly guaranteed car free route. Interesting product, but I as often hear the four wheeled phone or tablet using (with ev there's just tyre noise now) or two legged ear phone wearing hazards before I see them.

Grassey

AmberGold wrote: »

Obviously the safest option is none at all.

Obviously? :rolleyes:

A study by Dr Katrina Jungnickel and Dr Rachel Aldred found the use of music and headphones actually helped create a ‘sensory strategy’ that enabled the cyclist to cope with riding in a dangerous environment by effectively calming the overload of sensory data. The research was conducted on urban cyclists and showed that they were just as aware of their surroundings, if not more so, than other transport users and engage in sensory strategies that manage their exposure to risk.

While listening to music will no doubt mask some outside noises, an Australian study found that a cyclist wearing ear-bud style headphones and playing music at a reasonable volume hears much more outside noise than a car driver — even when that driver has no music playing.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/should-you-cycle-with-earphones-in-297887

GravelBikeBlog

occasionally I use the Aftershokz headphones but they create so much wind noise that I cant hear the music or cars when doing anything over 22-25kph

07Lapierre

I use Sennheiser CX Sport wireless earbuds. Took me a while to get them to fit/stay in my ears, but now I love them. Good sound.