Hello, Appreciate all replies and thoughts.
@tcherco: I have used this tempo trainer, and it does indeed replicate some of the things i am talking about–namely a controlled tempo. But the suggestions above incorporate a bit more, namely workout-length, programmable tempos in different beats–and different beats may be more efficient than others for a given athlete, or more comofortable, or simply more enjoyable. Also, a notion I didn’t mention was that one could “scan” through different beats–rock, latin, waltz, whatever–to determine which worked best. By “rock,” for example, I’m talking about not one, but many different beats. For example, I initially made a track of about ten different rock beats, and various others–each lasted a minute. I narrowed this down to a few, then constructed more specific tracks based on my response (both subjective and objective criteria, but not a physio lab!). Also one can direct a workout from one phase to another (warm up, main, cool down–all with coaching/voice reminders).
@Thomas Gerlach: congrats on Louisville–very impressive. Reading your race report, if I’m lucky, will have the same effect watching tennis pros does in lifting the game a bit. Regarding MP3 and fluid tempos, I have not used but am aware of this. While one’s favorite/traditional songs may happen to be “beats,” or a rhythm section, that is optimal/best seeming, it might not–the assumption that there is a “best” type of beat may or may not be so, depending on what criteria one uses (see below).
Also, part of the feature of the “beats only” is focus, so for purposes of developing technique/tempo of discipline turnover (ie, repetition rate of discipline-specific cycle–swim stroke forexample), I don’t regard “full song” as automatically/necessarily superior to "beats only;"this was the rationale for the thing to begin with. Also as with tcherco response above, these crafted tracks, following assesment of “best beats” by various criteria, allow definite workouts, coaching, etc.
@danicabell: if you/others are interested, I can make some of the tracks available, and/or describe how to make them (a keyboard with a build-in drum machine and some kind of recording technology), and thoughts on choosing different types of beats (also see below).
To critique my own suggestion now, it rests on several premises that the commenters have touched on somewhat:
-
there is a “best beat.” This may be defined by serveal criteria; for me, small but seemingly reproducible differences in heart rate on a fixed-speed treadmill (allowing for stabilization of heartrate/warm up) seemed to indicate that several of the beats (all 4/4 rock type beats with different fill patterns) were optimal for me in this sense. But I also just LIKE some better or have more fun with them, and this is an equally valid criteria for me. (some of the “fun” ones seemed to encourage a rather reckless headlong plunge that may be conducive to injury, so there are caveats as well!)
-
one can get over the idea of having a rhythm section only, instead of a song. I like the focus. It also may help with the “entraining” I mentioned, in which subtle differences in auditory cues (ie, the difference between distinct beat patterns) affect subltle changes in muscle use/activation/timing. While the preliminary/home “heart rate data” I mention in item 1, above, suggests this may be the case, more formal testing might quantify this and determine if it is a true effect. Also, a “bottom up” approach might make use of EMG leads (surface, not needles!) and analysis of the resulting timing/activation patterns of resulting muscle groups.
Interestingly, these might also be correlated with cognitive parameters such as attention–which could also be cued with voice/other means on the tracks themselves. Finally, I also enjoy the full song, and these days–trying to “come back” to tri after an injury–tend to use them more for focus/technique workouts in 10-30 minute intervals.