Ear/headphones and listening to music?

[reohn2]

Sorry R2, I was addressing the post before yours. I'll edit it to make it clearer.

We agree

I should've known

[mjr]

Not really, if the dulled sense remains adequate for the purpose.

But is it?
And why make life harder than it needs to be?

Yes, it is, because no hearing is necessary for cycling; and if the sense remains adequate then life is no harder.

The only time I wear a hood on the bike is if I'm riding off road that's mainly because it can impair my vision.

I wear one that can be fixed so it cannot obstruct my vision, short of shredding.

I like to be fully aware of my surroundings when sharing the road with motor traffic,too many idiots out there to trust any of them.

I don't trust them but on days like today, I am glad that I do not need to share my roads with motor traffic.

I'm merely giving my opinion that to me at least seems a logical one,no potential hearing impairment,no possibility of being elsewhere due to a musical 'interlude'.

Firstly, this argument that it's "logical" (or "common sense"?) can be applied to other useless bike-bashing measures such as the two Hs.

Secondly, I'm quite capable of getting lost in a musical "interlude" without actively listening to music

[Lance Dopestrong]

There's something logical about not deliberately dulling one of your senses when you're already at disadvantage and vulnerable in the first place,no?

Logical is it? Then where's the evidence proving the case? There must be reams of data supporting it if it's "logical". But there isn't.

What may seem intuitively correct rarely is when scrutinised.

[meic]

Logical is it?

I would say so, if you are relying on your hearing to save your life.

However on a bike you can get by with your eyes and brain. Lazily I will use my ears to warn me of danger which is not bought about by my actions but rely on my eyes alone before making actions.
I find that I can still use my ears even with the music, if it blocked my hearing in the way that a 25mph wind speed does then I wouldnt have the music that loud or on at all.

[reohn2]

Yes, it is, because no hearing is necessary for cycling;

In your world maybe.
We're discussing people who ordinarily with hearing,who deliberately impair it by masking it by music or other sounds,whilst being in a vulnerable position on the road.

and if the sense remains adequate then life is no harder.

But it isn't,is it?

I wear one that can be fixed so it cannot obstruct my vision, short of shredding.

Don't understand

I don't trust them but on days like today, I am glad that I do not need to share my roads with motor traffic.

My meaning was when riding in traffic,but you knew that right?

Firstly, this argument that it's "logical" (or "common sense"?) can be applied to other useless bike-bashing measures such as the two Hs.

But we're discussing self imposed hearing impairment and if it's detremental to cycling in traffic.

Secondly, I'm quite capable of getting lost in a musical "interlude" without actively listening to music

Me too but not whilst riding in traffic.

[reohn2]

There's something logical about not deliberately dulling one of your senses when you're already at disadvantage and vulnerable in the first place,no?

Logical is it? Then where's the evidence proving the case? There must be reams of data supporting it if it's "logical". But there isn't.

What may seem intuitively correct rarely is when scrutinised.

Disprove it then!

[Lance Dopestrong]

Ah, the cry of the flat Earther!

I'm quite open minded cos not being a headphone user I've no axe to grind either way - show us the evidence, I'd be happy to believe. Simply saying it is doesn't make it so.

[reohn2]

Ah, the cry of the flat Earther!

I'm quite open minded cos not being a headphone user I've no axe to grind either way - show us the evidence, I'd be happy to believe. Simply saying it is doesn't make it so.

I'm pointing out that earbuds can be the source of hearing impairment.
That's not desirable IMHO when cycling,and I've given reasons why it's my opinion,especially in traffic.
Some have pointed out they don't need to hear at all when cycling,I disagree,as I do.
Others say earbuds don't impair their hearing,I say if they have the volume down then that impairment will be minimised,but nevertheless an amount of impairment will be present.As the volume goes up,which in heavy/noisy traffic the temptation is to turn the volume up impairment will increase.
I've also pointed out that someone with permanent impairment is used to living with it,and so will make other adjustments living in the environment around them,possibly without consciously realising it.
Whereas someone popping in earbuds may not,because they're used to having full hearing ability without them.
There are a lot of if but's and maybe's,but in the absence of data we make our own judgement,my judgement is that in an aggressive road environment such as in the UK,the vulnerable road user increases their risk by wearing earbuds.
You don't have any data to support your argument as I don't,I'm merely pointing that out.

One last point,I'd also find music in my ears whilst riding distracting from the joy I find in riding bicycles.

BTW FWIW,I'm a tinnitus suffer so do understand a little bit about hearing impairment.

No flat earth just a bit of logical thinking,that's my view on the subject, YVMV

EDITED for typo's and clarification

[Brucey]

R2's views are pretty much identical to my own.

cheers

[Phil Fouracre]

+1

[meic]

I think that the increased level of risk is insignificant and may even be weighed out by the insignificant benefits.

The times when I forget to turn on my music is when I am engrossed in other thoughts. I suspect that I may be more prone to day-dreaming and wandering mind without my music than with it, however I think this is on the level of worrying about the sharp edge on a nuclear weapon cutting somebody's finger.

Music or radios certainly make driving safer, helping to avoid one of driving's perils, ie. falling asleep at the wheel.

[reohn2]

.....Music or radios certainly make driving safer, helping to avoid one of driving's perils, ie. falling asleep at the wheel.

Possibly,but equally possible someone driving and engrossed in the music they're listening to could have an opposite effect.
The difference between driving and cycling is the possible effect such possible distractions can cause possibly.
The driver is more likely to suffer a bent wing and an insurance claim whereas the effect for the cyclist most likely could be more severe.It's the food chain effect I referred to up thread.
YVMV

[meic]

Possibly,but equally possible someone driving and engrossed in the music they're listening to could have an opposite effect.

I was quick enough to realise that Bon Jovi and others similar had to be removed from my motorcycle play list and be replaced by the likes of Kate Bush or Clannad.

[reohn2]

Possibly,but equally possible someone driving and engrossed in the music they're listening to could have an opposite effect.

I was quick enough to realise that Bon Jovi and others similar had to be removed from my motorcycle play list and be replaced by the likes of Kate Bush or Clannad.

But many don't,in fact some may play Iron Maiden or Black Sabbath,(insert your own driving rock anthems to suit) for the intensifying effect.
Equally so it's possible Kate Bush or Clannad,may even have an undesired tranquil for some,a lullaby effect if you will,and along with it a softening of the senses which could be negative in heavy traffic.

Things aren't always what they seem for everyone,one size(sound)doesn't fit all .