liv | People who know things?

From:

A few months ago I needed to record a few voice clips of myself. I didn't get good results from any microphone I already had, but I bought a basic USB headset (Logitech PC 960, for £20-odd) and that seems to work fine.

As it happens the voice clips in question are only for my own use (they're part of a script which organises my exercise routine by shouting at me when I need to change over to the next thing I do), but I'd have no hesitation in using the same recording setup for something other people were going to hear :-)

For the software side, I'm currently using Audacity. (On Linux, though if I remember rightly it runs on all sorts of platforms.) That suits my use case well because it makes it easy to record each voice clip several times, play them all back, cut out the one I liked best, gain-adjust it to the right volume and save just that part as a wav file. I suppose if I were going to do any kind of longer thing, I'd probably need to automate that lot a little better.

Edited (oh yeah, you asked about software too) Date: 2015-09-25 11:04 am (UTC)

From:

lethargic_man

Audacity is indeed all you (

liv) need, if your microphone is of decent quality (which is easily assessed), for either Linux or Windows.

From:

liv

Brilliant, thank you. I was assuming I'd have to pick between various differently inadequate programs but it really sounds like Audacity is the right choice.

From:

cxcvi

I'll add that the Noise Removal tool in Audacity is pretty useful, assuming that you have enough sampled background noise. Starting to record a few seconds before talking should be enough for this.

From:

liv

Wow, that's good to know. And pretty clever, that it can digitally subtract background noise like that!

From:

hatman

Yeah, Audacity is definitely the way to go. You might want to check out the Libribox recording guide for further instructions and tips. (And, while you're there, maybe you'll choose to record something for them. They're pretty cool. I keep meaning to get back to them.)

From:

liv

Oh, good thought. I had forgotten about Librivox and they're of course the obvious place to look for tips on getting started with recording myself reading aloud. I agree it would be nice if I could volunteer to record something for them, too.

From:

liv

Thanks, this is super helpful. I think I have a USB headset somewhere, from when I had an older computer that didn't have a built-in mic. But it may have got lost in house moves, I'm not sure. Anyway, it's really good to have a specific recommendation for a specific brand of an adequate, cheap headset. And thank you for the software rec, that sounds like just the thing.

From:

hatman

USB headset is what you want. Amazon reviews will give you a good idea of how well an individual one works. I'm currently using one from Logitech (can't seem to find the model number, but it's old enough that they probably moved on). Plantronics is also generally good. Look for something that will be comfortable for the way you wear a headset and that has a noise-canceling mic.

But the trick is to get a direct USB connection. The less the signal has to be converted and processed, the better off you'll be. A USB headset will bypass your sound card, taking one step out of the process. But if you get a USB adapter, that sort of defeats the purpose.

From:

liv

Thank you, that's a clear explanation of why a USB headset is better than one that plugs directly into the mic socket. I've found my old kit now but it seems that the piece that holds the mic to the actual headband is snapped, and I think that's going to make it effectively unusable, so I shall look for Logitech or Plantronics equipment to replace it.

From:

lethargic_man

Also, what equipment do I need? I'm thinking lights obviously, panniers, and a lock, presumably a D-lock. Anything else?

Mudguards; some bikes come without. Hand-pump and repair kit. Make sure it's got reflectors if it's second-hand. Also, I recommend something hi-vis if you're going to be cycling at night, e.g. jacket or bandolier.

I'm approximately convinced by the argument that cycle helmets aren't a good trade-off.

Pshaw; Mayer Hillman's arguments cease to be valid the moment an idiot pedestrian steps out onto the road without looking and you come off and smash your head backward onto the road; or when you cycle past a street-cleaner just as the wind catches a bin-bag in his hand and inflates it so it snags your handlebars and tips you off your bike sideways (both things that have happened to me).

From:

liv

Aha, I thought you might have useful opinions about bike equipment, thank you for the suggestions. I'm assuming I can share

jack's pump and repair kit, that's not something we'll both need to use simultaneously. I hadn't thought about buying mudguards separately so that's a really good point. And yeah, reflective stuff as well as lights, both for my person and the bike. We're past the equinox so I can't just assume I'm only going to be cycling in the daylight.

I don't want to rehash the helmet debate too much, but I don't think anyone's claiming that helmets never provide protection. Rather that there are counter-intuitive risk compensation effects going on, both for the cyclist themself and for how drivers treat them, and that cycling is not sufficiently more dangerous than being a pedestrian to justify insisting on helmets. Also that it's overall better for cyclists collectively if everybody doesn't wear helmets, because fewer safety measures mean more people cycle and more bikes on the roads is safer. I'm not hugely ideological about this, anyway, but you're not making an argument that actually counters anti-helmet claims by detailing examples of circumstances where wearing a helmet is better than not.

From:

mathcathy

If your anti-helmet view comes from "it would be better if all cyclists didn't wear them", well, that world isn't ever going to happen. Most cyclists do wear them and will continue to.

I cycle sometimes with and sometimes without (mostly with) and notice absolutely no difference in driver behaviour. As a driver, I drive no differently whether a cyclist has a helmet or not. Sure, when I've fallen from my bike I've never hit my head, but if I did I would want a helmet for protection.

As an individual, of course, that's my choice, however I'm mystified by the people who seem to advocate not wearing protective equipment that can't possibly increase the risk of injury and could possibly decrease it.

From:

damerell

It can possibly increase the risk of injury. Risk compensation is the obvious cause, but also they increase the lever arm for rotational injuries of the spine, as well as fouling up one's instinctive sense of how large the head is.

Of course, this is speculation - but what's not is that population-level studies show no effect from helmet compulsion.

From:

liv

I am definitely definitely against helmet compulsion, but I think that's a slightly different question from whether I personally should wear a helmet when I cycle. If I have already decided I'm going to ride a bike, the problem of potentially compulsory helmets putting people off isn't applicable to me, for example.

From:

damerell

It's not that compulsion is bad (although it is) but that when compulsion makes people wear helmets, the predicted benefits don't manifest.

From:

liv

Yes, my main reason for not wearing a helmet is that it's better if nobody wears them. And my personal plans for cycling are low-risk enough that I don't think I'm putting myself in substantial danger in order to help make the world a better place. Pottering about Cambridge, mostly, riding slowly and sticking to dedicated bike paths as much as I can. Very different indeed from commuting across London.

Although you've said that cycle helmets can't possibly increase the risk of injury, there is in fact some evidence that they do; it depends really what you measure. If you measure outcomes for people who hit their heads then those wearing helmets are protected compared to those who don't. But if helmets lead, directly or indirectly, to more people having accidents, then overall they might still increase injury risk.

I'm not completely convinced by the ideas about risk compensation and changing driver behaviour myself, so mainly I'm thinking that I'll possibly slightly increase what is already a small risk to myself, for the sake of overall reducing the risks for the population by contributing to helmet-free cycling. Basically I see cycling without a helmet, assuming I'm going slowly on dedicated paths and quiet roads, as an acceptable level of risk, even if I might, arguably but not certainly, be slightly safer with a helmet.

From:

mathcathy

I tend not to wear mine for shorter distances, like to the station or the shops, or at weekends when traffic is lighter, but not because of safety reasons, more because it's a nuisance item to have with me after I've got wherever I'm going. That's never a problem at work and the roads are so busy that I feel like I'd be a fool, as an individual, not to be wearing one. Really, what I should do is get a helmet and lock that fit together so I can leave my helmet with my bike easily.

I went on a vineyard cycling tour last weekend and helmets were mandatory. It felt mad, the roads were basically empty, we were cycling as slowly as I've ever cycled. Still, it made the tour organisers happy.

From:

liv

It sounds to me like the vineyard tour organizers were pressured by their insurers to impose unreasonable safety precautions. That's nearly always the way with people who deal with the public, insurance companies don't understand risk trade-offs at all, they just want everything to be as low risk as possible.

But in general your approach sounds really sensible, you wear a helmet when you're cycling in busy traffic but not just to cycle short distances. I agree that a lot of the problem with helmets is finding somewhere to put them once you get off your bike, they're necessarily bulky. Maybe locking your helmet to your bike is the right answer.

From:

starlady

I would second the recommendation for Audacity as the editing program--it's full featured, fairly intuitive, and has a decent online help platform. Also, second the recommendation to use some kind of external mike; the one rec'd above sounds fine, and if you're not going to be using it heavily, you certainly don't want to go much above that price point. Equally to the point, the quality jump from in-device microphone (shudder) to cheap external headset/microphone is huge and well worth spending a small amount of money.

I use my bike for shopping and commuting and I would recommend what's called a hybrid, i.e. in between a road bike (thin tires) and a mountain bike (thick tires). You may also want to get a step-through frame, which makes it easier to wear things like skirts while biking as you don't have to swing your legs all the way up and over the seat. It's what I have. Lights, panniers (I actually only have one, but also technically this means getting a rack put on the bike to attach the pannier to), and locks--bike theft is terrible in the Bay Area, I use both a loop lock and a D-lock, ask the shop people to show you how--are essential, as is a helmet. I can't say this enough; I was doored by a car (in a bike lane, on a designated bike road) and was knocked unconscious, had to get 13 stitches, but I was basically fine--no concussion, even--because I was wearing a helmet. It was broken, of course, by the impact with the road and if I hadn't been wearing it I'd be brain damaged or dead.

From:

liv

Many thanks for this! I think it's pretty unanimous that I need Audacity; I feel like a bit of a dinosaur that I've never recorded my voice, so it's really helpful to get suggestions. And ok, I'll see if I can dig out my old USB mic, and if not I'll buy a new one, I don't want to make this recording into a huge enterprise but I don't want to come out with something completely rubbish in quality.

Thank you for good suggestions about bikes. I do wear skirts most of the time so I think step-through is the way forward. And yes, I need a rack to attach panniers, that's a really good point. I hadn't thought of getting a loop as well as a D-lock, so that's really good advice. People steal bikes all the time in the English Cambridge too, and part of me thinks that I just have to accept my bike will have a lifetime. But also some of my friends have said that they've gone years without a bike getting stolen if they use a D-lock, so that seems a good investment.

I'm sorry you had such a horrible accident, and glad that you were protected by your helmet. The evidence is really clear that in accidents where riders hit their heads, helmets have an important protective effect. However given that riders without helmets have fewer accidents, it's not a straightforward calculation, and I'm reasonably convinced that without helmet is better. I'm also not cycling in US cities which have considerably worse car-centric infrastructure than British ones, and that changes the balance of risk too.

From:

starlady

*nods* On the subject of locks, I use the loop lock on my front tire (which is on a quick release) and loop it into the D-lock, which goes around the frame and the rear tire. Someone once stole my front tire by cutting the loop lock (with wirecutters, they were prepared), but they didn't get the frame and the rear tire, so I was pretty happy.

I do take your point about the cycling infrastructure differential. Everyone in Japan bikes and almost no one wears helmets, but that's because bikes and pedestrians are unquestionably the priority traffic, not cars. (Though weirdly, penalties for drivers of cars hitting cyclists are often quite weak.) I actually learned to bike in Japan and I think nothing of not wearing a helmet here, but I would be really afraid to do the same in the Bay Area.

From:

liv

Thank you, that's really good advice about how to use the locks. The other advantage of a loop is that you can attach the bike to things like lamp posts which are too big for a D-lock, so that works. I do agree the safety calculus really does vary a lot with where you are; I'm in Cambridge, which is a very bicycle-centric city, though I don't think it's anything like as good as it could be. In San Francisco I'd be scared to bike at all, and if I did I'd probably wear a helmet in spite of all the statistics!

I like your very apt default icon, too, I forgot to say!

From:

ofunaq

Two locks is essential: I have a frame lock for the back wheel (e.g. http://www.abus.com/uk/Mobile-Security/Bike-Safety-and-Security/Locks/Frame-Locks), and also a D-lock. I find the frame lock amazingly handy -- it carries my keys while I cycle, it makes sure I don't leave my bike and house keys behind when I get on my bike, and it makes me lock my bike and take my key out, even if I park for a few seconds to pop into a shop.

When parking at Cambridge station, I lock up extra carefully. The ideal is to lock both wheels and the frame to the bike stand. With luck, I can do this on a Sheffield stand, by locking the back wheel to the frame, and looping the D-lock through the front wheel, frame and stand. Some sort of loopy lock would make this easier, but it would be harder to carry: my D-lock just clips onto the frame when I cycle.

I was very lucky to get a Belgian second hand bike from the old Station Cycles at Cambridge station. It's pretty much my ideal turn-up-and-go low maintenance bike: solid but not crazy-heavy, upright position, dynamo lights, hub gears (7 speeds, but 3 would have been enough), hub brakes, marathon tyres, mudguards, pannier racks, frame lock, D lock. For a longer ride, I try to carry a pump, as most leaks are slow enough that it's faster to pump up a flat tyre, ride 500m, lather, rinse repeat, especially if you're far from help, or commuting with time pressure.

For a cycling jacket, I like the blue Altura ones: very reflective, but not eye-wateringly high-viz.

From:

lethargic_man

Many thanks for this! I think it's pretty unanimous that I need Audacity; I feel like a bit of a dinosaur that I've never recorded my voice, so it's really helpful to get suggestions. And ok, I'll see if I can dig out my old USB mic, and if not I'll buy a new one, I don't want to make this recording into a huge enterprise but I don't want to come out with something completely rubbish in quality.

Your Skype headset ought to be sufficient.

Thank you for good suggestions about bikes. I do wear skirts most of the time so I think step-through is the way forward. And yes, I need a rack to attach panniers, that's a really good point. I hadn't thought of getting a loop as well as a D-lock, so that's really good advice. People steal bikes all the time in the English Cambridge too, and part of me thinks that I just have to accept my bike will have a lifetime. But also some of my friends have said that they've gone years without a bike getting stolen if they use a D-lock, so that seems a good investment.

You need to secure the frame, front wheel and rear wheel all to an immobile object if possible. This is the ideal solution; but it's indispensable (which means a chain (and ideally a D-lock, but I don't take one if I'm not leaving the bike long in public areas), or two D-locks) if your bike has quick-release wheels, because quick-release is quick-nick.

FWIW, I've been cycling to work for eighteen years now, and I've never had a bike nicked, though I've had two attempts to nick my bike, both foiled by my chain, and a horn nicked from my €25 bike in Berlin (it was almost worth more than the bike).

I'm sorry you had such a horrible accident, and glad that you were protected by your helmet. The evidence is really clear that in accidents where riders hit their heads, helmets have an important protective effect. However given that riders without helmets have fewer accidents, it's not a straightforward calculation, and I'm reasonably convinced that without helmet is better. I'm also not cycling in US cities which have considerably worse car-centric infrastructure than British ones, and that changes the balance of risk too.

My experience cycling in London (though not, curiously, cycling in Edinburgh) is that drivers aren't the problem; the problem is pedestrians taking one step out onto the road before looking to see if there's any traffic, which destroys your argument.

And if, by cycling without a helmet, you think you're creating a world in which the risk of head injury is lessened for all cyclists, maybe that's so but I still think it would be increased for you.

If you insist on doing that, at least get yourself an invisible cycle helmet. It'll be cool; you'll be living the Snow Crash world.

Speaking of invisible cycle accessories, check out this.

From:

naath

The evidence is that the risk of head injury is increased by helmet-wearing because the risk of *collision* is increased by helmet-wearing, and even if the helmet does protect your head (not actually proven in all circumstances, cycle helmets are surprisingly fragile) it does nothing at all to protect the rest of you.

The causation here is that both the cyclist and the drivers around the cyclist are likely to take more care to avoid risky behaviours (like cycling in the dooring zone, or tailgating) if the cyclist appears/feels more vulnerable.

From:

liv

Thanks for a nice succinct summary here. I believe in risk compensation, sure, but I suspect that the magnitude of the effects can get a bit exaggerated. Even so, that's in addition to slightly more complex indirect reasons why more cycle helmet coverage leads to more accidents, so that's a lot of reasoning pointing in the same direction, namely that I don't really need to wear a cycle helmet and in fact probably shouldn't.

From:

liv

I know I used to use a headset when we did Skype calls, but that was on a much older computer and I think I might have thrown it out when I moved to a tiny flat and was trying to be minimalist about possessions, as I didn't directly need it for VoIP on my newer computer. But it might be in a box of misc somewhere.

Thank you for the detailed description of how to lock up the bike. I was dimly aware that you have to lock up the wheels as well as the frame, but this is really clear on why. And yeah, I think it's worth spending money and effort on a decent lock if it means I can keep the bike for years rather than months.

Regarding helmets, if I were doing regular serious commuting in London, I'd wear one, so I'm not surprised that you make that choice. But I'm planning on occasional pottering about in Cambridge, mostly sticking to bike paths as much as I can, so I can do the civic thing of making cycling overall safer by eschewing unnecessary safety precautions.

I do love the cool futuristic tech! I think I don't need an invisible helmet, my problem with bike helmets is not that they're ugly and bulky, but that the expectation and practice of helmet use paradoxically reduces cycling safety. And I think I'd rather just wear plain reflective clothes than invisible reflective paint, but that is still some very impressive chemistry!

From:

damerell

I'm not sure the evidence is even really clear for that - certainly not if we discount the notorious TRT '89 study.

The things are engineered down to the standards to make them light and breathable, and the standards specify something about 1/8 as robust as the average skull. It might _feel_ akin to wearing a bulletproof vest, but it's more like putting a cigar case in your top pocket and hoping.

From:

liv

You may be right, I don't have all the key studies at my fingertips. What convinced me not to bother with helmets was Goldacre & Spiegelhalter's summary. They say case-control studies [...] have shown that people wearing helmets are less likely to have a head injury and cite a Cochrane review which sounded credible to me. That may well be the notorious TRT '89 study you refer to here, assuming 89 is a typo for 99, but that's not a single study, it's a meta-analysis. I was convinced by Goldacre's argument that even if it's true that helmets relatively protect people who have similar head-injuring accidents, if they also lead to helmet wearers having more accidents, their effect may be overall increasing rather than decreasing risk. That seemed to me adequate reason to eschew wearing a helmet, without having to give up the intuitively appealing idea that helmets are somewhat protective.

From:

damerell

I do mean '89 - Thompson RS, Rivara FP, Thompson DC. New England Journal of Medicine, 1989 v320 n21 p1361-7. 1989.

This started the whole thing off, and is where the 85% and 89% figures for effectiveness come from. http://cyclehelmets.org/1068.html (and the entire site is useful) discusses it in more detail, but the potted summary is that it's pretty dubious.

There is then an enormous collection of papers (often with some non-empty subset of TRT involved) which assume TRT '89 got it right and proceed on that basis.

You've found the Cochrane review from 1999 which is discussed at http://cyclehelmets.org/1069.html ... guess which three people did that review, assuming blithely that they got it right in 1989?

(Also, while this does not prove any misconduct, guess who funded TRT's research? The manufacturers of foam hats...)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1410838/ is a paper by Dorothy Robinson documenting some of the compelling evidence that no jurisdiction that has introduced and enforced helmet compulsion has produced thereby a significant drop in head injury rates. The only conclusion I can draw from that is that they _don't_ work; speculation as to why is interesting (especially when presented with the intuitively appealing idea that they must) but is ultimately not pertinent.

From:

liv

Wow, that's really egregious! A meta-analysis based heavily on studies by the review authors is one thing, but one based heavily on studies on the same data set, that's shocking. And if I had known that they were claiming helmets are over 80% effective I would have been way more skeptical, based on the Goldacre review I inferred just that helmets have some protective effect, which seemed uncontroversial.

I think there's a bit of problem with arguing from compulsion doesn't work to helmets don't work; an obvious explanation would be that the legislation is not effective at changing behaviour and not properly enforced. It's like comparing countries with different abortion laws; where abortion is in fact illegal the rate of abortion isn't substantially lower than in countries where the procedure is legal and available, but I don't think anyone would argue that abortion doesn't successfully terminate pregnancies.

But ok, it seems like the evidence in favour of helmets protecting cyclists is worse than I thought it was, easy enough to accept that conclusion given that it leads to the same decision I was planning to make anyway :-)

From:

damerell

Robinson and others do support that last step, which I agree is not trivial; it is known that in some of the places that have legislated there have been significant behavioural changes, more generally that legislation of various flavours has produced a wide range of behavioural outcomes... but it never seems to work, for all that.

So I'd say it's more as if governments keep legislating homeopathy. After a while one has to conclude it's not because people don't take their sugar pills, especially if we know full well in some places they do, but because they just don't do anything.

From:

damerell

You don't know that, of course. People have survived doorings (and much worse) without permanent consequences, helmets or no. Indeed, the sheer number of "saved my life" stories demonstrates that most of them must be false.

From:

liv

That's a really interesting point! I hadn't thought of the connection between everybody having a saved life story, and the likelihood that most of those people would have survived without a helmet.

From:

damerell

Well, quite. Something like one in three thousand UK cyclists can expect to die in the saddle - and of course not all of those will be of head injuries, of head injuries that even the most optimistic helmet proponents think are preventable, and of such head injuries not accompanied by other mortal injuries.

Given that, at a conservative estimate, one in ten helmet wearers will tell you a "saved my life" anecdote, we conclude:

1) helmets make you grossly accident-prone (in which case, don't wear one, and why don't helmet wearers keep breaking bones etc).
2) only the grossly accident-prone wear helmets (but clearly usage rates too high for that to be true).
or 3) nearly all these anecdotes are wrong.

From:

wychwood

a) Definitely definitely audacity, as everyone else has said.

b) Re: your comment below: pump is worth having one each because you ideally want to have a pump on you while you are out and about - if you get a slow puncture or just realise that you're a bit flat, you can fix things on the go. And they're so cheap that there's no real benefit to not having one each. Repair kits depend more on whether you would eg fix a puncture while out - I wouldn't, so it's not really worth carrying one around.

Gloves are very useful - I almost never wear them normally, but my hands get cold on the handlebars in all the wind. Also, if your chain falls off it's easily fixed but messy - get oil all over your gloves instead of your hands, that's my vote.

From:

lethargic_man

Repair kits depend more on whether you would eg fix a puncture while out - I wouldn't, so it's not really worth carrying one around.

I used not to, but if you get a puncture en route, it's a major nuisance having to continue your journey by other means and go back and collect the bike later. If you repair it on the spot, it's ten minutes out of your time (probably a bit more if you've not done it much before, maybe less if you use self-adhesive patches rather than vulcanising rubber glue), and that's it, you're back on the road, almost on schedule, and the issue is in the past.

From:

liv

That's a really good point. And puncture kits are small enough and relatively inexpensive, and if I'm putting my bag etc in panniers anyway, it's very little extra faff to have the repair kit live permanently in the bottom of the bag.

From:

wychwood

I'm never really cycling further than is convenient to walk (or switch to the bus) so that's less of an issue - and the amount of hassle involved in getting the tire off and checking the inner tube and so on, which I have to say has been substantially more than ten minutes when I've done it - I know that for me, I am simply never going to do that. But

liv may be otherwise situated!

From:

liv

Thanks, I think I'm likely to be more like you as a cyclist than like

lethargic_man; I'll mostly stay in town rather than going for long rides across country, and I'm not terribly mechanically competent. So I think I might just accept that if I get a puncture I walk the bike home or to a bike shop.

From:

naath

I despise fixing punctures; although part of this is that I own a bike whose rear wheel is impossible for me to get back on the bike...

When I do go far enough that "walk to bike shop" become non-viable I take *spare inner tubes* which requires less pratting about with glue.

From:

liv

I'm not terribly mechanically ept, I have to say. I think I might well end up taking punctures to the bike shop, and I'm considering shelling out for toughened tires. I'll see how things go.

From:

mathcathy

If you know how to do it :)

I've got a puncture in London before now, in the early mornings before the cycle shops open and have got my bike to the shop (because they're everywhere) and then tried to fix it outside. One time I spent over an hour fighting with the tyre before the professional came and fixed it in ten. I really really need to learn how to fix a puncture efficiently!

From:

liv

Yeah, this is one aspect of bike ownership I need to do some thinking about. In theory, I should learn to fix punctures and otherwise do basic maintenance. In reality I have limited time and lots of different skills I'd hypothetically like to learn, and given I'm planning to cycle through a town that's absolutely stuffed full of bike shops, maybe this shouldn't be a priority.

From:

mathcathy

It isn't my priority. There are London bikeshops that offer free workshops, but at 6pm and I can never be sure to be out of work and half across town by 6.

I carry the items much for the same reason as I always have jump leads in any car I'm driving. I can't use them alone, but good samaritan types can ... or I can offer them to people in need who need the equipment but have the skill.

From:

liv

Really good point. Having basic equipment on me so that I can lend it to someone else or so that someone else who's willing to help will be physically able to, given that puncture repair stuff is small and light, may still be a good trade-off. Thanks for the suggestion.

From:

liv

Yay, there's apparently a one true answer to the software question, that always helps.

Good point about having a pump I can take with me rather than just living in our shed. I think if I get a puncture I'm most likely going to walk the bike home and fix it there, but if I do start doing longer expeditions I should consider a kit.

Gloves is a really good point! What material is sensible for cycling gloves that are liable to get covered in oil? I usually wear gloves when I'm outdoors in the winter anyway, and I can well imagine that my hands will get even colder when I'm cycling.

From:

wychwood

Yeah, if I've got a non-slow puncture I've always just wheeled it to my destination, but longer trips would be different.

I bought a cheap pair of navy felt-ish wool gloves that I didn't mind ruining. Someone once lent me a pair of riding gloves, though, and that was useful - the rubber grip pads on the palm helped quite a bit! They would be more expensive, though.

From:

liv

Good to know. I think I'll carry on with my usual synthetic wool gloves and just accept that they'll occasionally get ruined; goodness knows I lose my gloves often enough that I treat them as consumables anyway!

From:

naath

Cycling gloves do not routinely get covered in oil. Handling the oily parts of a bike should be a rare thing (I once hired a bike that had a chain that fell off several times in the day I had it; this is unusual and if your bike has this problem take it to be fixed).

I buy gloves intended for skiing. Nice and warm.

From:

liv

I would have guessed that skiing gloves wouldn't give you enough dexterity for handlebars and brakes and so on! And I know that riding a bike is colder than just walking, so I might need to get something warmer than the basic gloves I usually wear through the winter.

From:

naath

I... have no dexterity in gloves. But closing-finger-round-ski-pole, er, handle-bar is totally do-able in even very chunky gloves (for me). I have twist-shifters for my gears (maybe they require less dexterity). Try the gloves you have first of course, maybe it won't be that cold.

From:

liv

OK, so it's still possible to control a bike while wearing thick chunky warm gloves, good to know! As you say, it's worth trying with my normal standard gloves and seeing if I need anything more elaborate.

From:

forthwritten

I bought some fingerless cycling gloves and wear a pair of woolly ones under them in cold weather - both warmth (from the woolly gloves) and grip (from the cycling ones).

From:

liv

That sounds like it could be a good trick. I will see how I go with the gloves I have, and be ready to invest a bit more in specialist ones if they turn out to be inadequate for either practicality or warmth.

BTW did you have any issues getting a bike that was the right height for you? I know you're quite a bit shorter than me, but I'm still shorter than the supposedly average (ie male) customer.

From:

forthwritten

I went about getting a bike in rather the wrong way - I wouldn't do the same if I were buying a bike now. I initially had a second-hand kids bike which was a bit too small, then a not-very-good hardtail mountain bike from Halfords that was at least the right size.

If I were doing it now, I'd go to an actual bike shop, be prepared to spend more and go for a hybrid. I would avoid buying online or buying a bike model you haven't sat on and test ridden - as well as frame size, you're going to want to test the distance between seat and handlebars.

Edited Date: 2015-09-28 07:33 pm (UTC)

From:

liv

Wow, what an awesomely relevant icon! And ok, I should be making test riding a priority; it seemed great when I went into the friendly bike shop and the guy said he'd drop some bikes by our house, but in fact he didn't do that, and he's hard to communicate with to find out why not. So maybe the answer is to try to go to a different bike shop where I can at least ride the bike round the block before I commit myself.

From:

hatam_soferet

Yes, mudguards! Otherwise you can't really go anywhere if it's even a little bit wet, which is idiotic. Also chain guards are useful if you're riding in skirts a lot, they add that bit of extra protection against getting your hem caught in the chain.

From:

liv

OK. I wasn't thinking of cycling anywhere actually muddy, but I still don't want to get spattered with mud if I'm riding through town in the rain. I didn't know chain guards existed, but thank you, that sounds really helpful to know.

From:

naath

oh yes, mudguards are very important. Cambridge streets aren't *muddy* but they are often *wet*.

From:

liv

It honestly seems strange to me that mud-guards are an extra you have to purchase separately. But armed with this information I will make sure to do so!

From:

damerell

It's not quite that bad - sensible bicycle shops sell sensible commuting bicycles with them, but the "bicycles for would-be racers" thing is commonplace.

From:

liv

OK, good to know. My instinct was that an independent bike shop like University Cycles would be a lot better than a chain store, but yeah, I want a functional bike, not a fast bike, and I need to find someone who's prepared to sell that to me.

From:

damerell

I, admittedly, have only bought one new bicycle ever - a Brompton - but I think you'll have less trouble in Cambridge than you might elsewhere.

From:

jack

What do you want to record?

From:

liv

A story for

ghoti :-) I don't know which story cos she hasn't told me yet, but she liked the idea of having a recording of me reading aloud that she could listen to when I'm not there.

From:

princessofgeeks

There may not be a magic, entropy violating machine, but bikes come pretty damn close. They don't need much maintenance if they are set up right in the first place.

I have no advice for you because I'm in the US and you're not, so I have no ideas what brands are available to you, or what prices are like over there, but ENJOY.

From:

liv

Thank you! This is really encouraging to hear and I really appreciate your good wishes. A lot of my social circle are really independent-minded maker types and I've sort of got the impression that I "need" to get good at bike maintenance to qualify to own a bike. But honestly, I'm not only time-poor but bad at mechanical stuff and I think I'll probably end up paying professionals for any maintenance needed, rather than that tearing my hair out trying to do skills I struggle with.

From:

naath

Bike fixing> If you don't want to do bike maintenance then most bike maintenance kit would be entirely wasted on you. A good track pump makes putting air in flat tyres easy, and might mean being able to ride it to the bike shop for further fixing so is probably worth it. Some spare inner tubes and tyre leavers (to get the tyre off) can be really handy if you are riding a long way from any bike shops, but if you are just going to be in Cambridge then there's little point.

Bike locks> D locks are better locks, but they are also REALLY ANNOYING because they don't fit round lamp posts or trees or other improvised bike stands. Also the good ones are very expensive. For me the trade off is that my cheaper bike gets a sturdy chain lock that goes round more things whilst the expensive bike gets a D-lock that cost more than many bikes (it was a condition of the insurance, I don't think I'd have gone with it otherwise).

Dutch bikes> the downside is weight. But Cambridge is flat. They are sturdy and reliable. And I quite like mine, except for the heavyness. Mine was about 150 from Colin second hand (a decade ago), although I went on to improve it with more gears and my preferred saddle (NB - saddles are very easy to change, if you find a nice bike with a horrid saddle then you can fix this by changing the saddle).

Bike accessories> some way of attaching luggage-to-bike is vital. Panniers are good, I also like baskets; although baskets do really change the handling of the bike. Many Dutch-type bikes come with dynamo lights, these have the advantage of never needing charging and remaining on the bike rather than getting lost. Chain guards, and especially fully enclosed chain cases are *brilliant* for avoiding getting clothes caught in the chain.

You should certainly take up the offer of an extended test ride; it's only by actually using a bike that you get a real idea of whether it is right *for you* - is it the right size for instance?

From:

naath

Oh, and apparently we're having anecdote central on the sodding helmet debate so I'll add mine - I am *queen* of falling off my bike (multiple times most years). I don't even need the provocation of "pedestrian stepped out almost on top of me", I can fall off just trying to stop in the regular way... (I have done this stone sober) although "evading speeding bus" was the most dramatic unplanned dismount. I have fallen over running (my own feet hate me), down stairs, off punts, and whilst walking (OK, that was drunk, in stupid shoes). I have sprained ankles and grazed knees and ruined the elbow of my leather jacket. Were I less blessed in the bone-density department I would likely (as at least two friends have done) broken my wrist, arm, ankle or even hip...

I have *never* fallen on my head. Not even the time I rode my bike *up a wall* (I was a small child and stupid) or the time I tried to do a wheely on a speed hump and flipped the bike. I honestly don't understand how people are falling and hitting their heads in low speed falling off incidents (when hit by a car at 30mph and one has rather less time to think) and mostly conclude that either helmet-wearing destroys one's sense of how one's body is positioned and moving in the world or that I am unusually good at falling (practice helps?).

From:

damerell

Well, I bang mine from time to time - I had quite a good prang 3 weeks ago, concussion, leaking claret from the forehead. But... no permanent consequences, I and I reckon the odds are good that if I were a foam hat wearer I'd have smashed said foam hat and now be proclaiming how it "saved my life".

The most egregious case of this I know is Simon Brooke, who crashed into granite boulders on a twisty descent at 46mph, breaking his neck (thankfully making a full recovery) but suffering no head injury at all. He would be proclaiming his helmet saved his life... except he was wearing a cotton cycling cap.

From:

liv

I'm sorry about letting the sodding helmet debate happen again here. I didn't mean to, but I didn't shut it down fast enough, and of the couple of hundred people who read my journal there are a bunch of shouty anti-helmet activists and a bunch of people who had never seen the assumption challenged that helmets are vital safety equipement, so.

If I were going purely by anecdotes, there seems to be a huge range in people's experience. I mean, I know quite a lot of people who have "helmet saved my life" stories, but beyond that, I know people who have been cycling regularly for decades and never fallen off at all, and people who get in lots of accidents, and then you come along and say you fall all the time but never hit your head. I am starting to feel that maybe brushing up my falling skills (did judo when I was 12-ish, but it's been a long time) would do a better job of protecting me than wearing a helmet!

From:

naath

Also you are totally welcome to try out either (or both) of mine, although they are neither of them to be confused with cheap you might get an idea of whether the step-through or mixte frames work well for you, and whether hub gears make any sort of sense to your cycling intuition (I love 'em, some people hate them).

From:

liv

Many thanks for the offer. I think if I could go into a shop with a clearer idea what sort of bike I want things would go better. I mean, I think I want a nice sturdy Dutch bike, step-through and upright, but I am not sure about that. Knowing whether hub gears in particular work for me seems like it would narrow the search space quite a bit. Also we're at least vaguely similar in height, I think (though I always forget how tall people are...)

From:

naath

I think we're similar, I'm a smidge over 5'.

From:

liv

Thank you. I'm very much leaning towards the stay in urban Cambridge and pay people to fix the bike if I have to approach. I know

jack has got really frustrated sometimes because his bike needs some minor fix, only it's hard for him when he doesn't do it very often, and it's difficult to get your ducks in a row to either fix it yourself or take it to a bike shop during working hours. But I think that's partly because he needs his bike for commuting, whereas for me, if I'm without a bike for a few weeks until I get round to fixing, it matters less.

That's a good point about D locks not fitting round poles, and that's probably a good reason to get a chain as well.

I do like the idea of a Dutch bike, and indeed that was Colin's first suggestion to me. I think I would rather have sturdy than light, especially as I intend to cycle short distances slowly in a flat place. I will see if I can get dynamo lights and a chain guard, too.

I think the test riding is going to be difficult. Partly because Colin was extremely vague about when he planned to show up and I'm just not at home that much. Plus I have a feeling that I'm going to be very biased by how comfortable the saddle is, but now you've given me this advice I'll try to compensate for that.

From:

naath

I work 5mins walk from a bike shop... so, er, I don't get the "it is a right pain to get the bike to the bike shop" problem. IWINODW has had good success with the bike shop on Arbury court, which is quite close to your house.

From:

liv

Yeah, I'm thinking Arbury Court might be the way forward, it's within sensible walking distance of my house and it turns out some of my friends have had bad experiences with University Cycles Colin.

From:

lavendersparkle

I suggest that for cycling about Cambridge, particularly if you're planning to cycle in skirts, a full chain guard and a skirt guard are very much worth it.

I bought my bicycle secondhand from Ebay. It was less than 50% of the price if it had been new. My feeling is that there is a time, cost, specificity trade off when buying bikes. Lots of people will pay a premium not to have to spend a month searching Gumtree for a suitable bike.

From:

liv

That's a helpful point about pricing. I think I would in fact rather pay a bit more for a bike I can just walk away with; as it is I'm struggling to find time to get to a bike shop and complete the transaction, partly because I'm commuting between two different cities. I would definitely rather go second-hand if possible, but I'm a bit scared that eBay and Gumtree are dominated by people fencing stolen bikes and I don't really want to support that.

Good to know about chain guards, thank you.

From:

josiahd

I've had decent results with Audacity for recordings.

From:

liv

Appreciated, thank you. Sounds like Audacity is definitely the way to go.

From:

emperor

Things you definitely want that aren't in your list - mudguards.

From:

liv

It seems strange to me that you have to buy those separately, but now I know I will make sure I do so. I assume it's sensible to just buy them from Colin in University Cycles along with a bike, or is that the kind of thing that you can sensibly get from the internet?

From:

emperor

It depends on the bike (mine came with them, for example). I find mudguards fiddly and annoying to fit, so I would ask the bike shop to fit them for you as part of the bike purchase, I think.

From:

liv

Yes, that's a good reason to buy them in person rather than online. And by the way, thank you for being an example of a person who doesn't have really great mechanical confidence, yet still rides bikes, because part of me feels like I don't deserve to have a bike unless I can do my own maintenance, and I'm pretty mechanically inept.

From:

ceb

I highly recommend Dutch bikes for your use case, though if you get a bike from Colin it will be reasonably-priced whatever it is; he's surprisingly hard to give money to.

Things that I find greatly reduce maintainance faff or otherwise make life easier, in rough order of cost:

* mudguards (you probably don't want the sort of bike that comes without as it will be either the wrong sort of bike for Cambridge or very cheap & nasty)

* a chain guard means you don't have to carry cycle clips around and don't have to worry about leaving your bike out in the rain where the chain will rust (Dutch bikes will have these)

* a skirt guard if you plan on cycling in long skirts or flappy coats. Again, Dutch bikes will have these.

* a dynamo with lights permanently attached to the bike (so you don't have to worry about batteries/carrying lights around) - these come in two sorts, hub (more expensive and make taking the wheel off a bit more faff, but super reliable) and bottle (cheaper but more likely to go wrong). You're less likely to get this already on the bike unless it's expensive, but they can be retro-fitted and you know lots of people who can do that for you.

* hub brakes and gears - Dutch bikes will probably have these. They reduce maintainance faff and leaving-it-out-in-the-rain pain at the cost of making it faffier to take your wheel off, but particularly in the case of hub brakes they're much easier to get safely aligned than rim brakes.

Remember when you're test-riding that saddle height is very easy to change, and Colin will happily swap the handlebars for ones of a different shape if you find the ones on the bike awkward (lots of Dutch bikes have very swept-back ones which I find uncomfortable).

From:

liv

Thank you, this is super helpful, especially having advice specifically targeted to reducing maintenance faff rather than optimizing for cost or awesomeness. Right, mud-guards, chain guards and skirt guards, I will make sure to ask about those. And that's really good info about hub brakes and hub gears, I will enquire. It really does sound like I need a Dutch bike, and that was definitely Colin's first instinct.

Good point about the saddle and handlebars. I think it's going to be pretty hard to make sure I test the frame rather than those changeable peripherals, but I'll try to keep that in mind.

From:

ewt

Haven't read other comments, pldase forgive repetition:

Mudguards and a skirt guard keep clothes clean and stop long skirts getting caught in your wheel.

A fully-enclosed chain stops clothes getting caught in the chain and also means the chain needs much less maintrnance. It also means you need to have hub gears (if you have gears at all). You may not want gears in Cambridge but if you do I think 3 should suffice. They're quite helpful on hills or in a strong headwind.

I like having a front hub dynamo which runs a very bright front and back light. This is expensive but means I am never caught without batteries in my lights. (I use battery lights also, partly because belt-and-braces, partly for better total visibility).

I wear a helmet that looks like a hat. This means I don't suffer as much from the "she has a helmet, I can pass v close" problem, but if I get squished by a lorry nobody will tell my grieving family I should have worn a helmet. Bandbox and Yakkay are two brands that sell helmets with various different covers. Neither are cheap.

I have never fallen off my Dutch bike and accept that in injury terms the helmet is probably extraneous.

For a "just get on and go" bicycle I think it's hard to do better than an upright Dutch-style bike. They are not light and therefore not very fast, but they're pretty reliable, and with the right panniers can carry a week's worth of shopping. Thry'd be fine for things like a day trip out to Wicken Fen for a picnic, too.

Your bike needs to be harder to steal than the other bikes. Using two kinds of lock helps.

From:

ewt

OK, having read the other replies:

-not all bicycle pumps will inflate all inner tubes. The two most common valve types are Schraeder and Praesta; a good track pump can cope with either of these. I usually try to pick one and stick with it because I always lose the adapter for my portable pump.

-I agree that it's worth spending money on puncture-proof tyres, especially on the back wheel, especially if you have a type of bicycle where removing the back wheel is a significant faff.

-I actually really love coaster brakes (pedal backward to stop: will fail if a) the chain breaks or b) you spend so long going downhill that it overheats and the metal deforms), but YMMV.

Lots of this is down to preference, so it is definitely worth spending time testing any bicycle you might buy.

From:

liv

Thank you, person with lots of experience of using bikes to get places rather than to go fast. And yes, I am very likely to end up cycling in skirts, so I should get a bike that works or can be modified for that.

When I was talking to the bike guy we agreed that I need few or no gears for Cambridge. And I definitely like the idea of a Dutch bike, I care more about reliable than light, and being able to carry things would be good.

I will see about dynamo lights; I don't think that's necessarily the deciding factor, as I can always get cheap battery lights and then upgrade to dynamo ones later, but I do like the idea of paying a bit more upfront and then not having to deal with batteries. Or lights which can be lost or stolen.

I am not sure I want to go to the hassle of a helmet that's disguised as a hat, but thank you for the tip.

From:

ewt

Not sheepish, but individ-ewe-al

Soundbite

Page Summary

Active Entries

Links

Expand Cut Tags

Subscription Filters