Listen to Music or not?

[Jezston]

I HEREBY OFFER UP A CHALLENGE

I have access to a couple of pairs of Binaural Microphones - these are small microphones that resemble earbuds which you stick in your ears and capture sound as if it what the person wearing them is hearing. I also have access to some good portable recording devices.

I propose an experiment - record a ride using them and nothing covering my ears so as to capture the sound of a ride as if I weren't wearing headphones. Then, another with my headphones on listening to music as I would. I can even combine this with a visual recording from my helmet cam.

Caveat: First I need to check whether they are suitable for the proposed experiment - one pair I have aren't in great nick at the moment (missing their housings) and it's possible they won't really capture sound in a close enough way to how I hear - microphones don't work in the same way as the human ear. It's possible they won't be able to handle the sound pressure levels from wind noise and just record a distorted mess.

If I can rule out the above caveat and demonstrate that any useful audible information is still maintained in either set up, will those against headphone use be willing to concede they are wrong?

 

[Jezston]

I should also add it may take me a while before I can get round to doing this.

 

[JamieRegan]

User, I think your arguements are appallingly rude. You're arguing against 3 people that are giving their personal opinion based on their experience.

In my experience, listening to music makes no difference whatsoever to my alertness and the awareness of my surroundings. You seem to me to be some old bloke sat in the corner of a pub arguing a 'principle' for the sake of an arguement.

If I cycle in rain or high winds, the noise from that is far more likely to distract me than my music. If I cycle on a busy road the noise of the traffic is more likely to distract me than my music.

Are you also saying that I shouldn't cycle on busy roads or when it's raining or when it's windy?

There are 101 things that can distract a cyclist, as I'm sure you know. My music isn't one of them, because I'm in control of it and I make sure it doesn't. It sounds like you're not the kind of cyclist that trusts yourself to do that, so you should respect my point of view, as I do for someone like you.

 

[rollinstok]

Car driver to police officer.. " I dont know, I just didnt see him"
Passenger to police officer.. " I,m saying nowt"
Police officer to prone ex cyclist.. " Hello.. hello.. hello.. can you hear me son ? "

 

[col]

[QUOTE 1725277, member: 45"]Less than you can if the sterio isn't blasting.[/quote]
The point being, inside a car with windows up how much do you think you hear from outside compared to a bike with one earpiece in?

 

[smutchin]

If I can rule out the above caveat and demonstrate that any useful audible information is still maintained in either set up, will those against headphone use be willing to concede they are wrong?

I doubt it - there's a fundamental difference of opinion here about the usefulness of auditory signals, so you're likely to get just as many different interpretations of your recordings.

d.

 

[rollinstok]

The point being, inside a car with windows up how much do you think you hear from outside compared to a bike with one earpiece in?

Point being, a cyclist isnt in a tin can with bumpers, impact zones, seatbelts and airbags

 

[smutchin]

Car driver to police officer.. " I dont know, I just didnt see him"
Passenger to police officer.. " I,m saying nowt"
Police officer to prone ex cyclist.. " Hello.. hello.. hello.. can you hear me son ? "

Obviously the driver would have seen him and avoided knocking him off his bike if he hadn't been wearing earphones. Stands to reason.

d.

 

[col]

Point being, a cyclist isnt in a tin can with bumpers, impact zones, seatbelts and airbags

We hear a lot more than cars anyway,and I dont think many car drivers are made unaware of their surroundings because they cant hear much from outside? and if your going to have an accident because you listen to some music, which somehow makes you unable to be alert to your surroundings, maybe you shouldnt be on the road in the first place.

 

[col]

[QUOTE 1725308, member: 45"]Less than compared to a bike (?) with no earpiece in...[/quote]
Ah good, now how many car drivers do you think are less aware of their surroundings because of this?

 

[col]

[QUOTE 1725311, member: 45"]But some of us could still hear more.....[/quote]
more of what?

 

[col]

[QUOTE 1725319, member: 45"]a) less than if they didn't have the radio blasting.

b) Drivers with 3 more mirrors than most cyclists, wearing a seatbelt and surrounded by airbags? Do you know much about risk assessment?[/quote]
And which sounds do you feel are more important to hear , so you could avoid an accident?

 

[smutchin]

[QUOTE 1725298, member: 45"]Why do you assume that you'll only normally hear a siren from half a mile away?[/quote]

I made no such assumption.

Any indication of something about to happen around you on the road is useful.

You assert this so confidently, I could almost believe it's true.

Conversely, I'd like to her your reasoning behind hearing being misleading.

You say you understand how sound waves work. Well, think about sound waves and human ears in the context of a busy urban environment...

d.

 

[col]

[QUOTE 1725334, member: 45"]I like to be able to make that choice while I'm on my bike, not while lying on the sofa watching Inbetweeners and talking to some bus driver who I've never met on the internet.[/quote]
So your avoiding answering as usual, I wonder why?

 

[smutchin]

[QUOTE 1725319, member: 45"]
b) Drivers with 3 more mirrors than most cyclists, wearing a seatbelt and surrounded by airbags? Do you know much about risk assessment?[/quote]

So people in control of two tonnes of fast moving metal have less need to be aware of their surroundings than the people they're sharing the road with who don't have that level of personal protection? That's perverse.

d.