Headphones Megathread

yannakis

Darkglasses wrote: »

I never use headphones cycling. Where I cycle I can usually hear a car long before I see them, so I'd rather not impede that.

I agree 100%:)

ror_74 wrote: »

If a motorist is going to rear end you, heaphones wont make any difference. (...)

We're not referring to careless drivers, but to cyclists who feel comfortable cycling with one sense less.

loyatemu wrote: »

A cyclist wearing headphones is still going to be far more aware of his surroundings than any driver.

The driver has a stable body posture, no wind blowing in his ears, and above all, mirrors. Also, the good driver has the windows always a bit open for sounds

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

As a driver do you ever hear cyclists ?

Drivers will see cyclists before they need to hear them.

carthoris

YanisK wrote: »

The driver has a stable body posture,

What does that mean ? Drivers are lazily cossetted in a plush upright chair which restricts their head/body movement when they need to look behind them? I find it far easier to look behind me on a bike compared to a car as I move my shoulders and core along with the my head. A chair/car seat restricts this movement.

YanisK wrote: »

no wind blowing in his ears,

But they have a significant amount of noise caused by the engine, road noise from the tyres, the radio, the other occupants in the car etc. But wait, if a cyclist is at a disadvantage due to wind noise and possibly cannot hear the traffic then what does it matter if they are wearing headphones or not?

YanisK wrote: »

and above all, mirrors.

Mirrors are on cars due to the restricted movement of the driver, the headrest and pillars make it difficult or impossible to see behind. Someone not in the car can easily look behind them as there is nothing to impede them.

Lumen

Your ears and eyes allow you to monitor what's going on in front and behind at the same time. Not even mirrors can do that.

yannakis

carthoris wrote: »

What does that mean ? Drivers are lazily cossetted in a plush upright chair which restricts their head/body movement when they need to look behind them? I find it far easier to look behind me on a bike compared to a car as I move my shoulders and core along with the my head. A chair/car seat restricts this movement.

haha ..really? ..did you ever feel the need to move your shoulders and core along with your head while driving?

carthoris

YanisK wrote: »

haha ..really? ..did you ever feel the need to move your shoulders and core along with your head while driving?

Yes I frequently do. Before changing lanes I will perform a check of my blind spots to ensure there is nothing there before I move but I have also had occasion to do it when I know there is a person somewhere near me but I have "lost" them, so I do it to check where they are. Perhaps I have restricted movement due do my overly developed physique (:cool:) but I find moving my shoulders and core (i.e torso) allow me to see more far more and on a number of occasions it has allowed me to see a vehicle/cyclist/other that was in my blind spot that my mirrors did not allow me to see. So yeah I do it all the time.

And the radio was blaring the whole time.

You should try it (moving your torso, not the blaring radio)

Sam Kade

There was a man killed a few years ago while cycling with earphones there was a tractor coming out of a field and he never heard it and it was too late before the driver saw him.

Capt'n Midnight

irishmotorist wrote: »

I don't think that comparing hearing on the bike and hearing in a car is a fair comparison. In a car, on a single lane road (which most of our cycling is done on), you don't have other cars passing you in a continuous stream. You are part of the stream which, for the most part, is going at the same speed and in the same direction. If the car behind you is closer to the kerb than you, then that has no effect on your. The car behind you isn't likely to try to overtake you and then turn left straight away.

On a bike, you are being passed constantly. Drivers have to judge your speed to decide what to do if there is a junction coming up (for example). Hearing their engine and thereby judging their intentions is one of the tools that cyclists can use to determine what is happening around them. Cyclist observation around them is obviously important too, but you know more when you can hear too.

So what you are saying is that if motorists obeyed the law and didn't overtake cyclists unless it was safe to do so and respected their right of way there wouldn't be any problems ?

And the only reason that cyclists need to have their wits about them is the illegal behaviour of motorists ?

68 lost souls

I like to cycle with headphones in even with no music just block out the wind. Maybe I should listen to a band called HTFU!

irishmotorist

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

So what you are saying is that if motorists obeyed the law and didn't overtake cyclists unless it was safe to do so and respected their right of way there wouldn't be any problems ?

And the only reason that cyclists need to have their wits about them is the illegal behaviour of motorists ?

No, I'm not saying that and please don't put words in my mouth. To clarify, I always believe that our own safety is our own responsibility. Sure, others have responsibility too, but I prefer to do what I can to negate any negligence on the part of others.

The example that I used - being overtaken only for them to turn left - is something that happens occasionally and is, in my view, a result of somebody misjudging conditions and making a mistake. Me being fully alert to the situation has stopped that mistake from becoming something more than interesting example.

This is only an example of a particular situation where I think hearing is very valuable. Much more common is when approaching a line of parked cars, for example, and I have to make my way around them. Hearing what's behind me informs me what to expect when I look over my shoulder before signalling and changing my position on the road.

No Pants

Why is anyone even responding to this poor attempt at a thread? It's not even an original topic and the motivations from bringing it up are dubious, as evidenced by the usual "I'm also a cyclist" nonsense.

Capt'n Midnight

irishmotorist wrote: »

No, I'm not saying that and please don't put words in my mouth

That's why there were question marks.

Part of the problem is that motorists are cocooned in a living room like environment, nice comfy chairs, reasonable sound system etc.

Rather than put the onus 100% on the cyclist shouldn't motorists have to interact more with their surroundings. If you've ever been woken up by the sirens of emergency vehicles it's because they had to make them louder than they used to be because cars were too isolated.

imskilguy

When I was a young lad I used to listen to tunes cycling to school, suppose when I was about 13 or 14.
But now I don't because there so much stuff going on when on the bike, it's mad out of it. There's lights (SLOWING), pedestrians weaving off curbs (LEFT), drains (DRAINS), potholes (HOLE), dodgy road surfaces (SURFACE), gravel on bends and descents (GRAVEL)... boss oh boss imagine if I had my techno beats going on, it could be carnage.

But if you can manage all the stuff and still get your fill of tunes, chapeau!

irishmotorist

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Rather than put the onus 100% on the cyclist shouldn't motorists have to interact more with their surroundings. If you've ever been woken up by the sirens of emergency vehicles it's because they had to make them louder than they used to be because cars were too isolated.

I think that the onus is 100% on all road users. However, I know that I make mistakes sometimes when I'm on the bike and when I'm driving. I know that other road users make mistakes, be it tiredness, radio or an excessively comfy chair or whatever, so I prefer to do what I can to accept this and shift the balance more in my favour.

To me, cycling with earphones pushes that balance the opposite direction and is adding another item to the list of possible contributers to a potential incident.

If motorists had to interact more with their surroundings - e.g. ban radios, enforce 'windows down', remove all blindspots - I would still be of the same opinion. Mistakes will still happen - be it distractions by other passengers, distractions outside the car or just plain errors of judgement. On the bike, I still want to be fully aware of what's going on around me with all of my senses.

In the end, it's a judgement call for each cyclist and their own risk assessment. Similar to another safety topic (which I won't name, for fear), some see no harm, others see it as a risk.

petethedrummer

I wear headphones but I have a microphone attached to the back of the bike. I run it through a little dynamo powered pre-amp to boost the signal so I can hear approaching traffic better. With this setup I can hear trucks rolling off the ferry in Rosslare and I can clench my bottom 3 hours in advance of any pass.

petethedrummer

And just to add, these are noise cancelling headphones. I don't want ambient noise interfering with the sound of what's going on around me.

The Bishop Basher

YanisK wrote: »

haha ..really? ..did you ever feel the need to move your shoulders and core along with your head while driving?

I sincerely hope you stick to the push bike and stay out of the car. Looking over your shoulder in the car is essential in many scenarios due to the blind spot. A classic example would be merging onto a motorway or dual carriage way. Another example would be when pulling away from a parked position. A quick glance over your shoulder is the only way to be certain the way is clear. In this case I would be primarily looking out for cyclists who can be easily missed on the mirror. If you're not doing this, you shouldn't be driving.

Common sense would dictate that having both eyes and ears when cycling a push bike surrounded by 2 Ton+ vehicles is infinitley preferable to having only sight.

Most people appear to agree with this and make some attempt to mitigate the danger to some extent. (music turned down low, listening to audio books, only 1 ear bud etc.)

Bottom line though is that impairing your hearing to ANY extent, is impacting on both your safety and the safety of other road users around you.

I can appreciate that cycling is boring without music but that shouldn't be the deciding factor any more then looking good should be a deciding factor for not wearing a helmet.

petethedrummer

Swanner wrote: »

Bottom line though is that impairing your hearing to ANY extent, is impacting on both your safety and the safety of other road users around you.

Can we quantify this impact on safety? Is it a 100% increase in the likelihood of death or a 0.00001% increase?

The Bishop Basher

petethedrummer wrote: »

Can we quantify this impact on safety? Is it a 100% increase in the likelihood of death or a 0.00001% increase?

I'll assume that's a rhetorical question as you know as well as I do that we have no way to currently quantify it.

All i'm saying is that common sense would tell you that cycling is safer when you employ both of your most important senses for this activity as opposed to deliberately employing only 1.

To claim otherwise is clearly nonsense.

Ole Rodrigo

Swanner wrote: »

I'll assume that's a rhetorical question as you know as well as I do that we have no way to currently quantify it.

All i'm saying is that common sense would tell you that cycling is safer when you employ both of your most important senses for this activity as opposed to deliberately employing only 1.

To claim otherwise is clearly nonsense.

I don't know why people assume wearing headphones eliminates your hearing faculties completely. Thats not the case at all, even when turned up full.

Swanner - your posts are an example of how the language of reason and borrowed authority can have an air of persuasiveness and can be used to talk complete sh*te.

petethedrummer

Swanner wrote: »

I'll assume that's a rhetorical question as you know as well as I do that we have no way to currently quantify it.

All i'm saying is that common sense would tell you that cycling is safer when you employ both of your most important senses for this activity as opposed to deliberately employing only 1.

To claim otherwise is clearly nonsense.

I'm not claiming otherwise and I don't wear headphones. But I think it's important to consider how much it actually impacts on safety. I genuinely don't care if someone else does it. If I'm driving, what's gonna happen me? If I'm cycling, my bike is next to silent and they can't hear me anyway. If I'm walking, they're on the road and I'm on the pavement.

The Bishop Basher

petethedrummer wrote: »

I genuinely don't care if someone else does it. If I'm driving, what's gonna happen me?

I think this is something that cyclists often miss and as someone who does both i'm surpised you take that approach.

As a driver, I never want to have a cyclists death or injury on my conscience. Regardless of whose fault it is, if I kill a cyclist or any other road user I have to live with that for the rest of my life.

So in response to "what's gonna happen me ?" Potentially a life riddled with guilt that somone died under the wheels of a car I was driving. I know i'll do everything I can to avoid that. I would appreciate if everyone else did their utmost to minimise the risk of this also.

It's a shared reponsibility.

petethedrummer

Swanner wrote: »

I think this is something that cyclists often miss and as someone who does both i'm surpised you take that approach.

As a driver, I never want to have a cyclists death or injury on my conscience. Regardless of whose fault it is, if I kill a cyclist or any other road user I have to live with that for the rest of my life.

So in response to "what's gonna happen me ?" Potentially a life riddled with guilt that somone died under the wheels of a car I was driving. I know i'll do everything I can to avoid that. I would appreciate if everyone else did their utmost to minimise the risk of this also.

It's a shared reponsibility.

Ah put away the violins. Of course noone wants to kill anyone. So you patiently give all cyclists a wide berth while driving; old, young, headphones, women, men, lycra clad etc.. I still don't see how a sober, law abiding cyclist, with both hands on the handlebars, going in a reasonably straight line, on a well maintained bike, using proper hand signals is going to end up under my wheels. Headphones or no.

The Bishop Basher

petethedrummer wrote: »

I still don't see how a sober, law abiding cyclist, with both hands on the handlebars, going in a reasonably straight line, on a well maintained bike, using proper hand signals is going to end up under my wheels. Headphones or no.

Accidents and collsions happen. They are never foreseen. If they were they wouldn't happen. Eg. Even a well maintained bike can fail. My steering may fail, I might have a stroke / heart attack and veer into them etc etc.

Quickest way to have an accident is believing you'll never be the cause of one.

petethedrummer

Swanner wrote: »

Accidents and collsions happen. They are never foreseen. If they were they wouldn't happen. Eg. Even a well maintained bike can fail. My steering may fail, I might have a stroke / heart attack and veer into them etc etc.

Quickest way to have an accident is believing you'll never be the cause of one.

What does any of that have to do with headphones?

And I presume you drive around urban areas with your windows open and the radio off? If not, why not?

yannakis

Swanner wrote:

I sincerely hope you stick to the push bike and stay out of the car.

When you are driving a vehicle at 50-80-100 km/h, you can't just look away from the direction you're heading at.. That's why we have mirrors in cars. If u wanna look wider on your sides you lean forward - that will change the angle.

mal1

YanisK wrote: »

When you are driving a vehicle at 50-80-100 km/h, you can't just look away from the direction you're heading at.. That's why we have mirrors in cars. If u wanna look wider on your sides you lean forward - that will change the angle.

I honestly don't think that true. Surely, a quick glance over your right shoulder is the method used by driving instructors and the driving test.

monument

Swanner wrote: »

I
Bottom line though is that impairing your hearing to ANY extent, is impacting on both your safety and the safety of other road users around you.

Time to ban sound insulation around the cabs of cars and the playing of music or talking in cars.

The Bishop Basher

petethedrummer wrote: »

What does any of that have to do with headphones?

And I presume you drive around urban areas with your windows open and the radio off? If not, why not?

What does that have to do with headphones ?

I don't drive with headphones in my ears and if there isn't currently a law banning it, there should be.

No Pants

Swanner wrote: »

I'll assume that's a rhetorical question as you know as well as I do that we have no way to currently quantify it.

I think it's clear that all deaf people are a danger to themselves and others. According to this (please ignore the people preparing to fight on the front page), there are almost 24,000 adults with severe or profound hearing loss. I can keep one safely in the cupboard under my stairs, but I'm going to need the rest of you to pitch in and do your bit.

arybvtcw0eolkf

I love the idea of the audio book, one I'll defo try.

(I wonder what the guys riding high horses in this thread wear?)