# Probably been asked a thousand times but....



## ScotiaLass (25 Sep 2013)

What's your views on listening to music whilst cycling?

I have always listened to music whilst out on my bike and will be using cycling paths/off road. 
Some stretches are going to be busier than others but with due care and attention I don't see why I can't have my music on.

Thoughts?


----------



## ianrauk (25 Sep 2013)

Moved to Helmet & Headphone debates.

Get the popcorn someone............


----------



## 4F (25 Sep 2013)

My personal opinion is that it is not a good idea and I wouldn't. Others will disagree with me however they are wrong 

This is a watered down version to my usual response and welcome to Cycle Chat


----------



## fossyant (25 Sep 2013)

Not for me. Ears and ability to hear whats going on around you which you can't see is important.


----------



## ScotiaLass (25 Sep 2013)

Ooooh, this topic has a whole board of it's own...sorry, didn't notice that!

Any advance on one earphone in and one out then????


----------



## numbnuts (25 Sep 2013)

It's your ride
It's your life
It's your choice


----------



## ceejayh (25 Sep 2013)

Personally, as a road user (don't tend to use cycle paths) I wouldn't have anything in my ears (unless it's wax!!) as I like to hear what's coming up from behind (that didn't come out right I know ).


----------



## sazzaa (25 Sep 2013)

I ride with one headphone in (left, so I can still hear traffic), but not at a daft loudness, just enough to hear the tunes and sing to myself.


----------



## Frood42 (25 Sep 2013)

It depends, when on the roads and not going for a long ride, then no, I don't listen to music.
On a long ride, then yes I may listen to music, with one in and one out.

On canal tow paths and other shared spaces, yes I will listen to music if I fancy (depends on the route).

Ear phones in when cycling is the same as a someone driving their car with the windows closed.

Being able to hear traffic can be an advantage, but should not be relied on, a shoulder check is much better.

Your choice though.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (25 Sep 2013)

I cycle to get away from it all, to listen to the birdies etc.
I think I'd rather hear the traffic than music if I had the choice.


----------



## Born2die (25 Sep 2013)

ianrauk said:


> Moved to Helmet & Headphone debates.
> 
> Get the popcorn someone............


I will bring the coffee


----------



## Glow worm (25 Sep 2013)

Some seem to cope fine with music and dealing with the road, others less so. I listen to music on my commute, albeit at a fairly low volume, low enough in fact that I can even hear the whirring of the cassettes of the numerous faster cyclists behind me wishing to overtake! so hearing cars / trucks etc is never a problem - and safetly/ awareness, for me at least, is not compromised. 

Each to their own really, the whole topic is probably best left at that.


----------



## benb (25 Sep 2013)

Personally I think it ought to be possible to have it at a level that is not significantly more dangerous than no music.
Others disagree.


----------



## MontyVeda (25 Sep 2013)

not for me personally... I prefer to hear the ambient sounds around me when out on the bike. I often listen to music as a pedestrian, but there's a part of me that worries I won't hear a car that's just mounted the pavement and is about to kill me, so I do feel a little more paranoid when i've got headphones in, even as pedestrian.


----------



## benb (25 Sep 2013)

MontyVeda said:


> not for me personally... I prefer to hear the ambient sounds around me when out on the bike. I often listen to music as a pedestrian, but there's a part of me that worries I won't hear a car that's just mounted the pavement and is about to kill me, so I do feel a little more paranoid when i've got headphones in, even as pedestrian.



I'd rather not hear it in that case! Ignorance is bliss.


----------



## StuartG (25 Sep 2013)

I have a deaf daughter. It taught me how much information hearing people get from the sound around you without being concious of it. When the brain spots an anomaly it just gives you the urge to glance in that direction. It could be a lifesaver. Hence I would never cover my ears unless it was very, very cold.


----------



## Hacienda71 (25 Sep 2013)

I did, now I don't. It is not illegal and therefore the choice is yours. I would agree that a shoulder check (lifesaver) is far more important than relying on listening for the vehicle that is about to pass you.


----------



## Gravity Aided (25 Sep 2013)

I use battery powered computer speakers, and hear both ambient noise and music.


----------



## ComedyPilot (25 Sep 2013)

I ride with music on sometimes, and other times I don't bother.

I have yet to get caught out being approached from the rear without knowing about it**

(** paging @Fnaar )


----------



## JonUK4 (26 Sep 2013)

I ride with them in, but usually listen to podcasts as the spoken word has enough breaks into it you can still hear around you well enough. I would say that the volume that I listen to anything is significantly less then the noise of the wind buffeting around my ears. At 20mph the wind tends to drown out the discussion I was listening to anyway so I tend to rely on what I can see and use my hearing to confirm when the already spotted vehicle is passing.

Much like driving a car, don't just check when you need to maneuver, constantly check your surroundings so you can deal with any situation as it arises.


----------



## Gravity Aided (26 Sep 2013)

Agree about the wind. Drowns out near everything, including traffic.


----------



## [Philip] (28 Sep 2013)

About 4 years ago, on Old Street, I knocked down a cyclists while riding my Ducati motorbike. It was quite heavy traffic so no one was going fast, the cyclist had no helmet on and was weaving in and out to get through the traffic. I was going down the outside of the traffic very slowly and the cyclist just weaved to the side right in front of me and I went straight into him.

He was fine, it could have been a LOT worse. He seemed oblivious to it. I went ape shoot at him for not having a helmet on, and for having earphones in. Before then I didn't have an opinion and when I cycled I would wear earphones and listen to the news quiz or just a minute podcasts (I'm so rock n roll!) but not any more, it's too much of a risk especially in London.


----------



## akb (28 Sep 2013)

I prefer to have all of my senses available when out cycling. So headphones is a no-no for me. Especially on a road ride.


----------



## mickle (28 Sep 2013)

Headphones in all the time @ full volume. I dont believe that anyone can tell if a truck approaching from behind is going to hit them or not by the sound of it.


----------



## mickle (28 Sep 2013)

The only downside is not hearing your bike creaking when it starts falling apart underneath you.


----------



## slowmotion (28 Sep 2013)

mickle said:


> The only downside is not hearing your bike creaking when it starts falling apart underneath you.


 Got a rusty chain?


----------



## ScotiaLass (29 Sep 2013)

Thanks for all the replies...a very emotive subject.

I will play it by ear <insert groans here> but as I have a very short journey to reach the dedicated cycle paths I will be using (about a mile), I will not use my headphones until I'm off the main road. Even then it'll be kept on a low volume (although I can't guarantee my singing will match that!) and I'll see how I go.
Thanks again for replying - you must get fed up repeating yourselves to us newbies


----------



## Venod (29 Sep 2013)

[Philip] said:


> About 4 years ago, on Old Street, I knocked down a cyclists while riding my Ducati motorbike. It was quite heavy traffic so no one was going fast, the cyclist had no helmet on and was weaving in and out to get through the traffic. I was going down the outside of the traffic very slowly and the cyclist just weaved to the side right in front of me and I went straight into him.
> 
> He was fine, it could have been a LOT worse. He seemed oblivious to it. I went ape s*** at him for not having a helmet on, and for having earphones in. Before then I didn't have an opinion and when I cycled I would wear earphones and listen to the news quiz or just a minute podcasts (I'm so rock n roll!) but not any more, it's too much of a risk especially in London.



Not wearing a helmet is not dangerous IMO, cycling with headphones is, if you had gone ape s*** with me for not wearing a helmet I'm afraid my response would not have been polite.


----------



## ufkacbln (29 Sep 2013)

There was research last year that showed the reduction in hearing using an MP3 player on medium volume was the same as the difference between opening and closing a car window.

If this reduction in hearing is dangerous then we should be campaigning for vehicles to travel with the windows open at all times!


----------



## [Philip] (29 Sep 2013)

Afnug said:


> Not wearing a helmet is not dangerous IMO, cycling with headphones is, if you had gone ape s*** with me for not wearing a helmet I'm afraid my response would not have been polite.


 
Whether your response would be polite, or not, would be of very little interest to me in similar circumstances.


----------



## Moda (29 Sep 2013)

ScotiaLass said:


> What's your views on listening to music whilst cycling



Not for me as riding distracts from the enjoyment of the music.


----------



## smokeysmoo (29 Sep 2013)

Always have, since the dawn of the Sony Walkman at least, and I always will




Unless I'm riding with others, then I don't.

FWIW I'm partially deaf anyway, in fact I even use a hearing aid at home, but I also have trouble filtering a lot of sounds, and unless the noise source is in front of me chances are I'd not know it was there anyway. My shoulder check is my angel.


View: http://youtu.be/egwARrX1ik8


----------



## ufkacbln (29 Sep 2013)

It's fair though?

Why should car drivers be allowed to willingly compromise their hearing?


----------



## Gravity Aided (29 Sep 2013)

Over here, we have many fellows who fill their car trunk (boot) with stereo speaker, especially a subwoofer, and then treat themselves and the general public to their "music" etc.. So loud you can hear the cars' body panels vibrate. Now _that_ is compromising one's hearing. Windows up? MP3? quiet in comparison...


----------



## ComedyPilot (29 Sep 2013)

smokeysmoo said:


> Always have, since the dawn of the Sony Walkman at least, and I always will
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Interesting point, and one I think has been mooted before:

So, is it ok for drivers to hit deaf cyclists?
Is it the cyclist's fault for being deaf?
How would a driver know the cyclist was deaf before they hit them?

Would I be right in .....assuming/thinking........ most people's view of hypothetical (and actual) car/cycle crashes where the cyclist has worn headphones is one where the car has hit the cyclist from the rear?

With the already stated wind noise etc, not to mention noise from other traffic (oncoming) it is IMO wholly wrong to say a cyclist can/should hear approaching vehicles - even without headphones. 

Wearing headphones is a personal thing. I do it sometimes, other times I don't. Sometimes I wear the nearside earpiece, and keep the offside free. A discreet mirror, and an almost unconscious shoulder checking routine more than compensates for what little I can hear anyway over the wind noise. 

Sure, hearing is a good sense to have, but a cyclist wearing earphones will never IMO excuse the driver of a vehicle hitting them from behind.....ever.


----------



## ufkacbln (29 Sep 2013)

[QUOTE 2680361, member: 45"]That's not the case, and it's very different. Drivers have access to three mirrors, wind and road noise are very different in cars. And many more.

That's why it's not a fair comparison.[/quote]

It is undeniable that these drivers have chosen to reduce their ability to hear by closing the windows..... should it be allowed?


----------



## ComedyPilot (29 Sep 2013)

[QUOTE 2680424, member: 45"]No driver should hit any cyclist, regardless of their level of hearing.

*The argument that wearing headphones when cycling is ok because deaf people are allowed to drive is stupid*.[/quote]

Where has that been argued...?


----------



## ComedyPilot (29 Sep 2013)

Spin it on it's head...is it ok to ram a car from behind if said car is playing loud music and impairing the driver's hearing?


----------



## ComedyPilot (29 Sep 2013)

@Cunobelin ......... in @User 's defence, wind noise in a car at speed makes it impossible to hear anything other that "roooooooar"........conversely and in defence of you, at low speed in town/urban areas etc, a car window wound down will enable a driver to hear lots of nearby traffic/noises/cycle bells/horns/emergency service sirens/peds voices.


----------



## ufkacbln (29 Sep 2013)

[QUOTE 2680457, member: 45"]It's common in headphone threads.[/quote]

The argument is that if cycling with impaired hearing is dangerous ....................then deaf cyclists should be assessed and if sufficiently impaired not be allowed on the roads, as they are by definition unsafe


----------



## ufkacbln (29 Sep 2013)

ComedyPilot said:


> @Cunobelin ......... in @User 's defence, wind noise in a car at speed makes it impossible to hear anything other that "roooooooar"........conversely and in defence of you, at low speed in town/urban areas etc, a car window wound down will enable a driver to hear lots of nearby traffic/noises/cycle bells/horns/emergency service sirens/peds voices.



I witnessed a close call at the "Marriott Roundabout" in Cosham the other night.

Fire engine with full "blues and twos" enters against the lights, all the traffic stops, except the BMW who changes lanes and shoots ahead, than slams the anchors on as he comes face to face with a very large slab of red fire engine. One can assume that he was audibly and visually challenged?


----------



## ufkacbln (29 Sep 2013)

.. but valid.


----------



## Bromptonaut (29 Sep 2013)

I'm in same camp as Monty Veda and others and would prefer hearing unimpeded for stuff I can't yet see or have missed as well as cues about vehicle behind. But them I'm a London Commuter.

The other point is that 'headphones' covers a lot of devices. Some are a loose fit in the ear and have open backs - you might struggle to hear music over the traffic. Others are closed, seal the ear canal and then add active noise reduction.......

YMMV


----------



## ufkacbln (30 Sep 2013)

[QUOTE 2680361, member: 45"]That's not the case, and it's very different. Drivers have access to three mirrors, wind and road noise are very different in cars. And many more.

That's why it's not a fair comparison.[/quote]

I have three mirrors.... one in the helmet (Reevu) and one on each handlebar end

I am so glad they will improve my hearing so that I can use headphones.


----------



## ufkacbln (30 Sep 2013)

What was said was that the existence of three mirrors meant that drivers did not need to hear what was happening around the vehicle.......


----------



## StuartG (1 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2683505, member: 45"]No-one has suggested that mirrors improve hearing. That's silly.[/quote]
Sorry to jump in but I find the need for this discussion quite sick. However I would be very willing to discuss it further in an alley somewhere at night. Only the deaf will be spared the screams.

The lack of a sense is a serious impairment. It increases risks to individuals. That's why we give blind people dogs and white sticks so they can use the streets freely. We don't allow them to become airline pilots 'cos not seeing the runway might be fatal to the two hundred folks behind. Its when we stop them being in the two hundred behind that trouble starts. That actually happens with deaf people. A certain airline refuses to fly a group because "they won't hear the emergency announcements". Yep, right but if they are prepared to take the risk should they be deprived of going on holiday together?

And so returning reluctantly to this debate. Not hearing is a serious issue for deaf cyclists. It is compensated to some extent by enhanced visual awareness which we hearing people do not develop. The threat is one they can choose themselves and it applies almost exclusively to themselves. A cyclist's threat of causing a KSI to other road users through not hearing is vanishingly small. The car is a more visual environment (mirrors) and the balance of benefit/disbenefit probably tilts the other way. You may have less to fear from deaf driver than a hearing one.

Of course we could just lock the blind, deaf and immobile in institutions and throw away the key. It would prevent the continual need to repeat the arguments above.


----------



## tmesis (1 Oct 2013)

I've always worn earphones when out on my own (just cheap, tiny in-ear ones) and have *never* been surprised by a vehicle coming from behind that I hadn't heard due to them. The wind whistling in my ears is far louder and distracting, with or without the earphones.


----------



## ufkacbln (1 Oct 2013)

Simply put....

One group (cyclists) decide to impair their hearing by using headphones

One group (motorists) decide to impair their hearing to a similar extent by closing their windows.

It is either safe to impair hearing in which case both are acceptable, or unsafe and both are unacceptable.

The number of mirrors is a flourrescently red herring......


----------



## ufkacbln (1 Oct 2013)

Disability is a totally different aspect, and individually asessed

Can a blind person drive?

The answer is yes they can

It is entirely possible to be regstered as blind yet drive a vehicle legally

The field of vision and which parts of that field are impaired will lead to a decision as to whether driving is allowed.

Equally a hearing impaired person can be a cyclist with little or no issue.

Richard Ballantine (Author, activist, advocate for cycling and someone who pioneered many of today's accepted practices) was profoundly deaf from birth


----------



## sazzaa (1 Oct 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> Simply put....
> 
> One group (cyclists) decide to impair their hearing by using headphones
> 
> ...



So the vulnerability of the road user doesn't come into this at all? You really believe it's a fair comparison with regards to safety?


----------



## ufkacbln (1 Oct 2013)

sazzaa said:


> So the vulnerability of the road user doesn't come into this at all? You really believe it's a fair comparison with regards to safety?



Taking the vulnerability into account would surely mean that the driver compromising their hearing is the greater threat and therefore more unacceptable?


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (1 Oct 2013)

When I listen to music, I use open ear bone conduction headphones that way you can hear the music and traffic around you

http://www.aftershokz.com/


----------



## booze and cake (2 Oct 2013)

To say riding with headphones automatically makes you dangerous is bull and I find it as annoying as the 'you should be wearing a helmet' argument. Unfortunately if you are involved in any incident you can bet the first thing that will be mentioned will be the fact you had headphones in, as often is the fact you were'nt wearing a helmet, even if these have no bearing and the incident was entirely the fault of the driver. Drivers far too often use it as a deflection tactic to steer attention away from their god awful driving.

I always ride with music and its second nature now and I feel lost without it. Some people like it, some don't, end of. I do most of my riding solo, including centuaries and its a great accompanyment to the journey, some thumping dance music goes really well if I'm feeling like a fast ride. 

I've cycled in London for over 15 years without any music playing related incident (its not so loud I can't hear sirens) but when I'm out in the single lane county roads with blind corners I pause it or stop it so I can hear advancing traffic before I can see it. Otherwise, play that funky music white boy......and sheesh anything to blot out the din of the great british public, most of which I have no interest in hearing anyway.


----------



## ufkacbln (2 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2684906, member: 45"]That's more like it, you're considering more elements of the assessment.

Risk to? Risk from? What risk? When and where? Physical factors?[/quote]

The part that mirrors play in the hearing of the motorist.....


----------



## ufkacbln (2 Oct 2013)

Lets play the games...

Common everyday occurrence..

A cyclist is proceeding toward a junction, they are on a main road, and there is a side road joining with a "Stop" line.

A vehicle is approaching the stop line, and should stop. The motorist takes a cursory glance and fails to register the cyclist, and a few feet in front of them starts to pull out.

The cyclist uses the bell to warn the motorist of their presence........

Which motorist will hear the bell better and register the cyclist approaching from their left and stop in time to allow the cyclist to pass the junction without taking evasive action?

a. the one with compromised hearing because the windows are shut ?
b. the one with the greater hearing because the windows are down?
c. The one looking in the three rear view mirrors?


----------



## sazzaa (2 Oct 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> Common everyday occurrence..
> The cyclist uses the bell to warn the motorist of their presence........



Who does this?! It's lolworthy.


----------



## ufkacbln (2 Oct 2013)

sazzaa said:


> Who does this?! It's lolworthy.



AirZounds are apparently too noisy!


----------



## Roadrider48 (2 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2680047, member: 45"]It's not really an equal comparison, is it?[/quote]
I agree with you mister p. IMO totally irrelevant to the topic in hand.


----------



## Roadrider48 (2 Oct 2013)

From now on make all cars without windows.


----------



## Roadrider48 (2 Oct 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> Disability is a totally different aspect, and individually asessed
> 
> Can a blind person drive?
> 
> ...


Are you seriously comparing deaf people to blind people? Wow!


----------



## ufkacbln (2 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> I agree with you mister p. IMO totally irrelevant to the topic in hand.


Rather more convenient than actually discussing the issue.....


Question - how important is the the auditory input to road users?


----------



## ufkacbln (2 Oct 2013)

Roadrider48 said:


> Are you seriously comparing deaf people to blind people? Wow!



Is that also rather inconvenient?

Impairment is not limited to one sense. The perspective is just how much impairment one is willing to tolerate in road users.


----------



## buggi (2 Oct 2013)

just bcoz you hear a car doesn't tell you whether its going to hit you or not. I've ridden with, and without, and don't think it makes any difference coz i would never move out without looking. Its only the same as playing loud music in your car IMO. the biggest problem is, if you do get knocked off, whether the insurance company will use it to reduce your compensation.
i get the reports of near misses at work. Interestingly, one driver reported nearly hitting a cyclist on a left turn. He turned left at the same time as the cyclist and states the cyclist was wearing head phones. Clearly the driver is under the impression that this caused the near miss... Not the fact he hooked left around him. perhaps he thought if the cyclist heard him he would have got off the road for him???


----------



## ufkacbln (3 Oct 2013)

I had one of those at a car park and complained

From the woodwork came two witnesses who backed ip the driver's story that I was nowhere near the turning and that I had been aggressive , foul mouthed and intimidating

Asked for the statements to be placed in writing..... Then produced the video that showed the witnesses were not where they claimed to be, that I had not dismounted the trike, approached the driver or spoken to them


Apparently they had confused it with "another incident" and apologised 

Not however before being given a warning


----------



## ufkacbln (3 Oct 2013)

Back on topic....

The insurance issue is another reason for a level playing field

That is why the unpopular analogies are important

If impairing your hearing is unacceptable on a bike then it should be unacceptable in a car

If choosing not to prevent injuries by wearing "protective" equipment is used against cyclists then choosing a vehicle you know will inflict greater injury should be used against a motorist


----------



## Booyaa (3 Oct 2013)

StuartG said:


> Sorry to jump in but I find the need for this discussion quite sick. However I would be very willing to discuss it further in an alley somewhere at night. Only the deaf will be spared the screams.



Really?


----------



## sazzaa (3 Oct 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> Question - how important is the the auditory input to road users?



In a car, not very. I drove with tunes on full blast yesterday and it made no difference to anything (probably because when you drive you aren't relying on outside noise to warn you of any danger, unlike on a bike), the only thing I found myself being concerned about was that I wouldn't hear any emergency sirens. I resolved this by looking in my mirrors a bit more. On my bike I like to hear what's going on around me, as a matter of safety, because I'm far more vulnerable on a bike. Can you really not see the difference?


----------



## ufkacbln (3 Oct 2013)

sazzaa said:


> In a car, not very. I drove with tunes on full blast yesterday and it made no difference to anything (probably because when you drive you aren't relying on outside noise to warn you of any danger, unlike on a bike), the only thing I found myself being concerned about was that I wouldn't hear any emergency sirens. I resolved this by looking in my mirrors a bit more. On my bike I like to hear what's going on around me, as a matter of safety, because I'm far more vulnerable on a bike. Can you really not see the difference?




Hardly considerate or safe driving and certainly in contravention of the Highway Code.... nice admission!

As for your opinion the pertinent point is that you "like" to hear what is going on.... an entirely personal choice, yet you are quite happy to drive in contravention of teh Highway Code!!!!

Also a fail in the theory test


Leaving aside the dodgy driving........your whole argument is based on a self admitted preference!

What you need to answer is the following:

If I choose to ride my trike in the same dangerous way you drive:

I rode with tunes on full blast yesterday and it made no difference to anything the only thing I found myself being concerned about was that I wouldn't hear any emergency sirens. I resolved this by looking in my mirrors a bit more.

Why should a cyclist not compensate in the same way?


----------



## ufkacbln (3 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2689318, member: 45"]Wrong question.[/quote]

...or one you simply wish to avoid?

Why can a cyclist not compensate?

Disabled people do this all the time!


----------



## ufkacbln (3 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2689332, member: 45"]You're verging on the nonsense again.

Clue -disabled people _have to _do this all the time.[/quote]

Bizarre!

Are you really suggesting that cyclists cannot compensate?

You are fixed with this weird idea that mirrors in a car mean you do not need to hear your surroundings, yet mirrors on a bike don't have the same magical effect!

In both cases the ability to hear your surroundings enhances your ability to respond to events


----------



## sazzaa (3 Oct 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> Hardly considerate or safe driving and certainly in contravention of the Highway Code.... nice admission!



Can you point me to where in the Highway code it says that I MUST NOT listen to music? Because all I could find were advisories and to ensure safe driving practices at all times. I was perfectly safe thanks, not entirely sure what you thought was going to happen. But I am happy to admit I'm wrong if you can find the relevant rule!


----------



## ufkacbln (3 Oct 2013)

sazzaa said:


> Can you point me to where in the Highway code it says that I MUST NOT listen to music? Because all I could find were advisories and to ensure safe driving practices at all times. I was perfectly safe thanks, not entirely sure what you thought was going to happen. But I am happy to admit I'm wrong if you can find the relevant rule!



You are really that unaware of the Highway Code!

The theory test states that:



> You should not allow yourself to be distracted when driving. You need to concentrate fully in order to be safe on the road. _*Loud music could mask other sounds, such as the audible warning of an emergency vehicle.*_



Then see rule 148

Yet you seem to be claiming that you can manage quite well with maximum volume, despite the evidence against your claims!

Loud music is shown to impair response times and increase accidents!

But I am sure you are exempt from this


----------



## sazzaa (3 Oct 2013)

Should not, not MUST NOT. There is a huge difference.


----------



## sazzaa (3 Oct 2013)

Also, feel free to link me up to some evidence too. I'd like to read some published studies on the matter if you've got any to hand? I always wondered if the type of music you listen to makes a difference too....


----------



## ufkacbln (3 Oct 2013)

sazzaa said:


> Should not, not MUST NOT. There is a huge difference.



The Highway Code is an enabling document.... and your assumption that just because the wording is "should not" allows you to drive in contravention is extremely worrying.

If you choose to do so you are demonstrably failing to drive to a reasonable standard




> Although failure to comply with the other rules of The Highway Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts to establish liability. _*This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ *_or ‘do/do not’.
> 
> Knowing and applying the rules contained in The Highway Code could significantly reduce road casualties. Cutting the number of deaths and injuries that occur on our roads every day is a responsibility we all share



Which other "should not" rules in the Highway Code do you consider yourself exempt from?


----------



## sazzaa (3 Oct 2013)

So tell me, how exactly was I in danger on my journey to work in my car? What happened? What risks did I take? Were you there? Can you honestly say I was driving dangerously or carelessly due to having music on?


----------



## sazzaa (3 Oct 2013)

Interesting! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130606101550.htm


----------



## ufkacbln (4 Oct 2013)

sazzaa said:


> Interesting! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130606101550.htm



... and fails to support your bad driving as she does not mention volume.


----------



## ufkacbln (4 Oct 2013)

sazzaa said:


> So tell me, how exactly was I in danger on my journey to work in my car? What happened? What risks did I take? Were you there? Can you honestly say I was driving dangerously or carelessly due to having music on?



You have admitted driving in contravention of the Highway Code .... demonstrably failing to drive to a required standard, that is sufficient (see above)


----------



## sazzaa (4 Oct 2013)

Ha, expected a bit more meat to your argument but never mind!


----------



## ufkacbln (4 Oct 2013)

Who needs meat!

YOU openly boast about driving in contravention of the Highway Code............ and then vainly try to justify it

That is all anyone needs to know


----------



## sazzaa (4 Oct 2013)

You do realise that repeating yourself doesn't make it an arrestable offence? And still doesn't make my driving unsafe. But keep spouting the same old crap anyway, it's quite amusing.


----------



## 4F (4 Oct 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> The Highway Code is an enabling document.... and your assumption that just because the wording is "should not" allows you to drive in contravention is extremely worrying.
> If you choose to do so you are demonstrably failing to drive to a reasonable standard
> Which other "should not" rules in the Highway Code do you consider yourself exempt from?



You do of course realise that the Highway code says you "should" wear a helmet, no mention of thudguards though. Are you exempt from that one ?


----------



## Frood42 (4 Oct 2013)

4F said:


> You do of course realise that the Highway code says you "should" wear a helmet, no mention of thudguards though. Are you exempt from that one ?


 
ooohhh 

https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82/overview-59-to-71

*59*
*Clothing.* You should wear

a cycle helmet which conforms to current regulations, is the correct size and securely fastened
appropriate clothes for cycling. Avoid clothes which may get tangled in the chain, or in a wheel or may obscure your lights
light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other road users to see you in daylight and poor light
reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in the dark.
 

The pedestrian one is interesting, there is no should wording, but gives sensible enough advice.

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35

*3*
*Help other road users to see you.* Wear or carry something light-coloured, bright or fluorescent in poor daylight conditions. When it is dark, use reflective materials (e.g. armbands, sashes, waistcoats, jackets, footwear), which can be seen by drivers using headlights up to three times as far away as non-reflective materials.


----------



## ufkacbln (4 Oct 2013)

4F said:


> You do of course realise that the Highway code says you "should" wear a helmet, no mention of thudguards though. Are you exempt from that one ?


See above!


----------



## ufkacbln (4 Oct 2013)

sazzaa said:


> You do realise that repeating yourself doesn't make it an arrestable offence? And still doesn't make my driving unsafe. But keep spouting the same old crap anyway, it's quite amusing.






Have you ever thought of joining the ABD or Safespeed?


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2013)

Odd


----------



## Phaeton (18 Oct 2013)

I've stopped using earphones as they are so dangerous







Alan...


----------



## Frood42 (18 Oct 2013)

Phaeton said:


>


 

All they need is some flourescent lighting and they could go hang out with the car yoof and their bass destroying systems...


----------



## Gravity Aided (19 Oct 2013)

Hook up a few bottle generators and some florescents, wouldn't be much more drag than the system already is.


----------



## ufkacbln (19 Oct 2013)

Frood42 said:


> All they need is some flourescent lighting and they could go hang out with the car yoof and their bass destroying systems...



From the US....

Fossil Fool and Soul Cycel come up with some superbly tricked out bikes:



It even has a neon hoop for a "Gogo Dancer" !


----------



## Dan B (19 Oct 2013)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/coruskate/1820566650/

some of those systems had/have kW amps, don't think a few 3w bottle dynamos are going to supply all the current required ...


----------



## ufkacbln (19 Oct 2013)

Dan B said:


> http://www.flickr.com/photos/coruskate/1820566650/
> 
> some of those systems had/have kW amps, don't think a few 3w bottle dynamos are going to supply all the current required ...




IIRC...The middle one is Beatrix, a project of one of the YACF denizens


----------



## Dan B (19 Oct 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> IIRC...The middle one is Beatrix, a project of one of the YACF denizens


Correct. The two either side are the Bassfreight (left), which appears weekly in summer on the Wednesday night LondonSkate, and the Firebrox (right), which used to go out on the Friday skates but these days is in storage in Basingstoke

(Anyone want to buy a Brox Compact and an allegedly 2kW battery-powered PA system? Will split ...)


----------



## anothersam (27 Oct 2013)

ScotiaLass said:


> Thoughts?



I take my pleasures where I can find them.



mickle said:


> The only downside is not hearing your bike creaking when it starts falling apart underneath you.



Seriously. Thought I'd enjoy an unplugged ride the other day and discovered some bike noises that needed investigating. Until I got back home I had to plug back in to keep my attention on the road and not the cacophony between us.



booze and cake said:


> and sheesh anything to blot out the din of the great british public



Also seriously. Music hath charms to keep me from getting riled by unsolicited comments from my often excitable fellow road users.


----------



## PlymSlimCyclist (6 Mar 2014)

When I first returned to cycling, I would cycle with my music on, incredibly loud, however a close pass too close (rode the passenger window for a few yards), so I stopped.
Although while I was listening, I frequently checked over my shoulder, it wasn't enough to stop me riding against someones car. So easy solution, headphones out, phone screen off (I use a Tigra mount), and enjoy the road and ride.


----------



## lay (8 Apr 2014)

I've used hp for longer than a care to remember...i know for a fact that i hate it when you're going for it and a REALLY bad tune comes on radio like witney spears or something  and you cant turn it off because of losing momento.. though sometimes i take them out as i get tired them.


----------



## david k (19 Apr 2014)

If im on my own i wear headphones plugged into my ipod. I usually ride on trails and tracks so no other traffic. I do ride on roads also but tend to keep the volume low and frequently look over my shoulder and have a mirror also, never had an issue


----------

