JoeyBike

I wouldn't do it. But if you feel comfy and safe doing it I say go for it.

DeadGrandpa

I almost always ride on rural roads; when I listen to radio, it's talk radio (don't know if that is any safer than listening to music) but I always (listening or not) ride as though a car or truck is behind me. I am hugging the white line on the edge of the pavement. With nothing in my ears I've been passed by cars I didn't know were there (just getting used to my new mirror, 5 weeks ago) because they were so quiet. I have incorporated mirror check into my riding now, and am not surprised anymore. I started this thread to find out how other riders feel about listening/riding and appreciate the feedback. My $10 radio got soaked last week and it doesn't work so good anymore...thinking about putting in earplugs to cut the wind noise.

With respect to your signature, JoeyBike, I have often called myself an idiot. Wish I could find a job needing that quality as a job skill.

gl98115

Who are these people?

Mark Stone

The people that mistakenly equate these acts as equal in danger.

keyven

I'm sure many drunks feel "comfy and safe" enough to drive home. Many text-drivers feel "comfy and safe" texting while driving. Many salmon bikers feel "comfy and safe" riding against traffic.

The vast majority of drunks get home safely. The vast majority of texters don't run over cyclists. The vast majority of salmon bikers do it for years without incident.

That must mean it's okay to do those as well right?

Jaywalk3r

Likewise, just because someone doesn't do something, such as riding with earbuds, because they don't feel comfy and safe doing it, does not imply that it's dangerous.

I used to refuse to listen to music while I rode, thinking it compromised safety. Then I allowed myself to listen to earbuds when I rode at night, because I got visual cues of traffic approaching from the rear from their headlights. But I also realized that I could still hear them approaching as well as before, because my earbuds didn't block external sound, and I don't listen to my music at excessively high volume. So I started listening to my earbuds during the day, and at night, I allowed myself the luxury of listening to music through my in ear monitors. I found those didn't block out the sounds of traffic that I wanted to hear, either. Now I use them during daylight as well.

My three month summer bike tour would have sucked without music. (I started without, and it was a huge improvement when I went back to listening.) Not once was it ever a safety factor.

keyven

I do ride with music in one ear. Everyone here has their own version of what constitutes 'a safe ride'. Just like every driver has their own version of what constitutes 'safe driving'.

Ride or drive long enough without incident and the majority of us are going to get just a little lax in terms of safety and awareness. It's human nature.

As long as nothing happens - be it running red lights, having a few beers before getting into a car, salmoning up a roadway, texting while driving, etc - people are hardly going to believe they're the 0.1% who will be involved in a serious accident, or else they wouldn't do it.

I-Like-To-Bike

Do you also attribute to "human nature" the absurd concept that innocuous activities like passively listening to background music while cycling or driving, is comparable in risk to running red lights or driving under the influence of intoxicants or texting?

kickstart

I know every time I ride on our local MUT, and every day on my commute, I will encounter ear phone/bud wearing pedestrians and cyclists who are using the road/MUT in a disruptive obstructive manner that I can't communicate my presence to, and are unaware of my presence.

Even though people are capable doing it responsibly, a large percentage can't, and others have no way to know one from the other.
Responsible use includes an awareness of that, and acknowledging that they are aware others are present.

Leebo

Don't own any ear buds. I'm usually focused on the task at hand, staying alive. I listen for cars, the sound my wheels are making and any other bike related noises. Plus birds and nature stuff. I have enough voices in my head that I don't need to add anymore.

ItsJustMe

You said:
That seems like a pretty definitive statement. With hearing, you're safe, without it, you are not. I would contend that you're never really perfectly safe regardless.

I absolutely can hear those things with my single earbud in. Just this morning, while listening to my podcast, I could hear my brake on the rim, stopped to check, it was just sand on the pad, and I also noticed that my chain needs lube, it's clicking a bit more than normal.

My experience (I will stop calling them facts, though I have to say that I'm not calling your opinion facts either) is that I can hear cars WAY, WAY WAY WAY before they are in any way relevant to my situation - I can hear them 30 seconds before they get to me. If I had to, I could stop, dismount, pick up my bike and walk 20 feet off the side of the road from the time when I first hear them until they get to me. I'm not sure how running with both ears open instead of only one would make me any safer than that.

Yes, I absolutely agree that hearing is important. However, there's a certain level of hearing that is baseline adequate for safety, and having more than that is not going to make you any safer. Riding a bike with bionic ears that could hear a caterpillar crawling through the leaves 100 feet away would not make me safer than riding with my normal ear that can hear a car approaching 500 feet away.

My study was noting how far away I can hear cars approaching with my single earbud in versus no earbud. There was no difference. I'm riding and hear a car, I look in the mirror, I can't even see it. 10 seconds later it comes over the hill, still several hundred feet behind me. But apparently that's not good enough for safety.

I contend it was a controlled study. The control was riding with no headphones for several commutes and noting how many seconds before they got to me I heard the cars. Then I rode with earbud in and did the same measurement. The difference was in the noise (sometimes a second or two MORE time, sometimes less, never more than something like 2 or 3 seconds in a 20 second timeframe). If I just rode with the earbud in, counted seconds, and said "meh, good enough" then that would NOT be a controlled study. It did have only one participant, so it is not valid for everyone, or even for anyone but me, but I feel that it's valid for me. Control does not imply large statistical sampling, it just says "control."

That's the thing about cycling. Absolutely every single person has a different situation. No matter what I do, no matter what YOU do, it's NOT the right answer for everyone out there. There are things that are the absolute right choice for one person that would get someone else killed, and vice versa.

I would also be interested to hear how you feel that I am "making everyone else less safe" by having a single earbud in that does not actually impact my ability to operate safely.

Anyway, religious argument. You can say anything you wish, you're probably not going to change my mind. I could present a fully controlled scientific study with 10,000 participants and I wouldn't change your mind. So we're just typing to no purpose at this point.

SBinNYC

That's a very biased test. You have determined what you can hear. You have not determined what you cannot hear. Your test procedure will never allow you to determine that.

The B

This thread is very much like helmet threads, and about as relevant.

GP

and mirror threads.

LesterOfPuppets

The reduction in what is heard was determined. He had 2 or 3 seconds less warning with one earbud.

He had as little as 17 seconds warning with one earbud, as little as 20 seconds without.

mrodgers

The conclusion that I can come up with from reading others' thoughts in this thread is, you are making everyone else less safe because you will automatically start weaving and roaming around on the road because you wear a single earbud. That's the only thing I can come up with.

badrad

Huh?

kickstart

My compliant is I'm often unable to communicate my presence to users that I will come in close proximity to such as on a MUT, bike facility, or sidewalk, therefore I need exercise far more caution than non users require. Without some form of acknowledgment I must allow for the possibility they will do something unexpected through unawareness.

I-Like-To-Bike

My guess is that there is a clique of A&S posters who think that because they are incapable of riding safely while listening to audio while cycling, that such a simple task is beyond the skill set of anyone else.

Sorta like riding safely and chewing gum concurrently; too hard for me, must be unsafe!

I-Like-To-Bike

I do not know of any need/requirement for cyclists who are riding properly and legally (or pedestrians) to ever provide any form of acknowledgement to demanding or obnoxious cyclists.

Just pass legally, and stop expecting some form of acknowledgement of your presence from every other cyclist and pedestrian.

I-Like-To-Bike

How can you keep focused on your "task" of listening for bike and car related noises when you dangerously divert attention to non task related and irrelevant birds and nature stuff?

Jaywalk3r

If something eventually happens, it is exceedingly unlikely that earbuds play any role whatsoever in the accident. They just don't pose the danger many here seem to believe they pose.

LesterOfPuppets

I usually pass without warning them. Definitely obey the 3' law, usually prefer more if space is available. I'm always prepared to slow to walking speed to wait behind walkers if there is oncoming walking traffic, also.

kickstart

Its just common courtesy to acknowledge when someone makes the effort to communicate with them, especially where its required like on a MUT.
If someone makes the choice to do something that's perceived by others to be a potential impairment, is it too much that they make an extra effort to show they're not?

I'm ready, willing, and able to do the right thing, all I'm suggesting is a little cooperation for our mutual benefit, is that too much to ask?

superslomo

I don't wear them on a motorcycle, and I don't wear them on a bicycle. I think maybe that it's a distraction, maybe that I can hear less around me, but I also know that there's a higher sound pressure that I perceive in the ear from the wind + the audio signal, and I worry about tinnitus. I also find myself just distracted and annoyed by fiddling with the wire and keeping my head still to keep from popping out the earbuds and whatever else. Never really did it, so I guess I don't miss it.

I have, however, been doing a controlled experiment for years, and I can say that making and eating cheese OR chocolate fondue while riding a bicycle does not distract me at all, so I do that INSTEAD of listening to podcasts or balinese gamalan music.