Headphones and Cycling! Is it safe?

[JoysOfSight]

The problem with the sunglasses analogy is that you can't ride safely if you're blind, whereas you can ride safely if you can't hear, as in fact you can easily demonstrate to yourself by buying a pair of cheap earplugs and riding to work. The world will shockingly fail to end and those who are inclined to lane change by sound will probably (hopefully!) notice their observation skills getting a better workout, with a corresponding improvement in life expectancy...

 

[marzjennings]

There is no point on this part of the journey to make constant shoulder checks as at times I can go 20 minutes between seeing a car.

See this is what I don't get, by listening out for cars you've cut down your awareness distance to 10s of metres (unless it is a noisy car) instead of 100s of metres if you were looking over your shoulder. Even if it is just one car every ten miles I'd still like to know where it is as soon as possible.

 

[BentMikey]

Not since Cab's last post have I ever read such rubbish.

If you really believe hearing is so important to you, my challenge is this: Present us with some youtube footage, helmet camera mounted, of your own riding, and let us take a look and see just how well you're looking around yourself.

 

[BentMikey]

If I hear a car / tractor behind me and I also note that ther is a car / corner also approaching from the opposite direction then I would take a strong primary to control the situation, if there was no such hazard then I would continue in secondary. There is no point on this part of the journey to make constant shoulder checks as at times I can go 20 minutes between seeing a car.

To me that's an admission of less than perfect riding practice. Not looking is a fail because your hearing can't tell you that there's no vehicle behind you.

 

[4F]

To me that's an admission of less than perfect riding practice. Not looking is a fail because your hearing can't tell you that there's no vehicle behind you.

You did not read my post correctly. I said "There is no point on this part of the journey to make constant shoulder checks as at times I can go 20 minutes between seeing a car"

I did not say I did not make checks, I make allowances for the conditions accordingly.
The busier the road the more lifesaver checks I would make.

 

[4F]

If you really believe hearing is so important to you, my challenge is this: Present us with some youtube footage, helmet camera mounted, of your own riding, and let us take a look and see just how well you're looking around yourself.

I have no intention of becoming a helmet cam warrior and the only time I will wear a helmet is on the track.

 

[Moodyman]

23 pages and still going strong.

Let's see if we can make this is the longest thread.

I've done my bit with this post.

I'll be back in a week. Don't want you to let me down now.

 

[Bromptonaut]

See this is what I don't get, by listening out for cars you've cut down your awareness distance to 10s of metres (unless it is a noisy car) instead of 100s of metres if you were looking over your shoulder. Even if it is just one car every ten miles I'd still like to know where it is as soon as possible.

I think the point you’re missing is the vision and hearing are not proposed as alternatives.



Vision is the primary sense and (most of my riding is in London traffic) I'm constantly looking behind - glancing over alternate shoulders. Hearing augments vision and fills gaps - I cannot swivel my head like an owl!!. One can hear an ambulance in the next block or a motorbike concealed behind a bus. Noise detects from the booma-booma noise that the Saxo behind is a chavmobile or, filing in the gaps between the 'life savers', ascertains that the revving wvm behind is a twonk and will probably push through.

If others feel safe with anything from a single open backed earpiece to full on sealed ANR headphones that's fair enough. But don't label me a poor cyclist because I'd prefer not to.

 

[JoysOfSight]

One can hear an ambulance in the next block

OK. So, suppose you and I are riding along when you hear the sound of an ambulence, somewhere, but I am a deaf person. What is it that you do that makes you safer, at that point, than I am?

This is the presumption that I don't get. Quite understandable that people *like* to hear far-off ambulences, or even nearby motorbikes. But when it comes down to it, what do you *do* about the ambulence that makes you safer, if you can't actually see it?

If others feel safe with anything from a single open backed earpiece to full on sealed ANR headphones that's fair enough. But don't label me a poor cyclist because I'd prefer not to.

How these things turn around. I don't think anyone is making the argument that riding without headphones is unsafe (!!), only that if you are observing correctly, it is not necessary to be able to hear (notwithstanding that significant noise can be heard over music anyway).

If you look up the thread there are no shortage of comments that if you ride with headphones in, bad things are bound to happen.

 

[Bromptonaut]

@joys of sight

Hearing the ambulance (or police car) converging from the next block tells me I may need to move over (this is London - emergency vehicles often pass wrong side of traffic islands etc.

BM and possibly Marz seem to suggest that somehow using my hearing makes me less observant; I reject that proposition.

 

[marzjennings]

I think the point you’re missing is the vision and hearing are not proposed as alternatives.



Vision is the primary sense and (most of my riding is in London traffic) I'm constantly looking behind - glancing over alternate shoulders. Hearing augments vision and fills gaps - I cannot swivel my head like an owl!!. One can hear an ambulance in the next block or a motorbike concealed behind a bus. Noise detects from the booma-booma noise that the Saxo behind is a chavmobile or, filing in the gaps between the 'life savers', ascertains that the revving wvm behind is a twonk and will probably push through.

If others feel safe with anything from a single open backed earpiece to full on sealed ANR headphones that's fair enough. But don't label me a poor cyclist because I'd prefer not to.

No the problem is hearing is being proposed as an alternative to frequent checks over the shoulder.

The only way hearing could augment your vision is if you incorporated what you heard with what you've seen. For example seeing the car behind you and by its engine noise determine it's a diesel.

That actually may be a good reason to be able to hear a car, to augment what you've seen. For example, if you see a car waiting to pull out from a junction AND you can hear that the engine's being gunned you can assume the driver's going to jump into traffic as soon as possible and as a rider you may take additional care as you approach them. Whereas if you're unable to hear the engine note, you will be unaware of the potential urgency by which the car will try join the road. Hmmmm.

 

[Arfcollins]

[QUOTE 554543"]
Can you quote what I actaully said rather then try and merge mine and some other persons post.
[/quote]

Sorry Lee, I'm not very experienced in the art of posting/quoting and I was trying to put your post into context. Hopefully most people got my gist and understood I wasn't trying to put words into your mouth.

 

[Norm]

No the problem is hearing is being proposed as an alternative to frequent checks over the shoulder.

Was it? Any chance you could find that as I've just skimmed the thread and didn't see it myself.

 

[fossyant]

I have no intention of becoming a helmet cam warrior and the only time I will wear a helmet is on the track.

That's only cos you have to , and someone DID do...... (i.e. ride over 4F's head) heh heh...no names............. (not me) PS anyway...get back up here for a spin mate on your next "business visit".....

 

[iAmiAdam]

I wear headphones and can hear perfectly well, I will continue to do so as long as I have my ipod and heaphones.

tbh, it doesn't distract me either, it stops my mind wandering after 20 miles. So surely this is a good thing?