People who know things?

[liv]

So, practical advice sought:

A] Does anyone have any experience of making voice recordings? Podfics or reading poetry aloud to share digitally, that kind of thing? It doesn't need to be professional level or even close, but it needs to be good enough quality that the words can be heard relatively clearly. Ideally I don't want to buy a lot of equipment or spend hours doing audio processing, but I'm not sure what the minimum set-up is to achieve this. I mean, my computer has a reasonable basic mic which is good enough for things like voice calls. And I know a lot of my students use their smartphones to record tutorials and so on, and apparently that's good enough to be a revision aid. So I imagine this should be possible without major investment, but I don't know where to start.

Software recommendations especially appreciated! My desktop is Windows and my phone is Android, and my netbook is going to be Linux eventually but that's a topic for another day.

B] I'm in the process of buying a bike. I've talked to Colin at University Cycles, and he's super helpful and has offered to lend us a couple of bikes at the weekend so I can try them out. What should I be looking out for when I try the bikes? What questions should I be asking? Also, what equipment do I need? I'm thinking lights obviously, panniers, and a lock, presumably a D-lock. Anything else?

I don't expect to become a serious cyclist any time soon. I'm intending to use the bike just to potter about Cambridge, so if I can go slightly faster and with slightly less effort than walking, that's about all I'm after. One of the suggestions Colin made was a Dutch bike, which he said was solidly built and easy to maintain; definitely those features are more important to me than speed or being fantastically light or suitability for difficult off-road trails. I'm approximately convinced by the argument that cycle helmets aren't a good trade-off.

I'm not quite sure how best to judge the price point for a new bike. I would rather buy a second-hand, good quality bike than a cheap rubbish new one, but I'm not sure how much of a premium there actually is on new bikes; I suspect most people feel like me. And I'm certainly willing to pay a bit more upfront for a bike that is easy and pleasant for me to use. But equally, if it does happen that the bike becomes my major means of transport or I get excited about long distance rides, I can always sell my starter bike and buy something more specialist; I don't want to buy a very fancy vehicle off the bat though.

I'm probably not going to be a very self-sufficient sort of bike owner; I'll most likely take the bike to the shop for anything more complicated than a puncture. I do appreciate that there's no such thing as a magic, entropy-violating machine that keeps going forever with no effort, I just don't want to make bike maintenance my major hobby.

I know there was something else too, but it's gone out of my mind. Anyway, please express opinions!

Comments

[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).

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.