This post is a question for the greater community.

Which is the tryptamine (or psychedelic in general) which you have experienced with the FEWEST visual effects, while still producing the psychologic effects?

Specifically I am curious which compound you think isolates the psychological effects of the psychedelic experience most completely.

Let me give some examples, although none of the ones I'm mentioning truly meet this criteria (which is why I'm asking for all of your opinions and experiences):

MiPT (N-Methyl-N-Isopropyl-Tryptamine) : Often reported as having very few visual effects at doses up to about 25mg. Most people report strong psychedelic effects but not many report visual distortions. It isn't really what I am looking for though, because at higher doses of more than 30mg most people do report classical psychedelic visual effects.

MDMA: No visual effects for most people and somewhat psychedelic. However there is a definite limit to how far one can go with it, and it certainly isn't a tryptamine, so I would say that it doesn't really count.

DiPT: (N,N-Diisopropyl-Tryptamine) : By most accounts it produces very strong auditory distortions but few visual distortions. Although this compound seems to meet the requirement that there be little to no visual effects, the extremely strong auditory effects seem to shift the focus of the experience in that direction rather than in the direction of psychological effects.

5-MeO-DMT : This is probably the candidate which I know of which comes closest to what I mean. Although some very mild visual effects are reported by some people the main focus is clearly psychological. Ego dissolution and mental effects seem to be what it produces almost exclusively. If something is known which produces effects similar to 5-MeO-DMT but which is longer lasting, (especially something orally active), as well as producing similar psychological effects with less intensity, then this is what I mean.

Thank you for you input I'm curious to hear what you have to say.
(Edit: If you disagree with any of the ones on the above list and think that they meet the criteria then please mention that too!)

For me, it was a DET (diethyltryptamine) or aMT.

At what dose did you take them if I may ask? Also, what method of administration did you use?

As shocking as it may seem, DMT for me. I haven't vaped pure DMT but i have smoked Changa, and i've worked with oral DMT using Rue, and Rue/Harmala extracts, quite extensively and with different dosages. DMT is hardly visual at all for me, i do get some mild imagery with closed eyes here and there, sometimes i get open eyed mental imagery, rarely i've seen actual open eyed visuals from DMT aside from contributing to the tracers with the Harmalas, and i did have a precognitive vision of my dad's death which was full on and as clear as day with closed eyes, but other than that, nadda. For me, DMT is all about the physical, mental, spiritual/mystical. I've also used oral DMT with Moclobemide instead of Harmalas and did get some open eyed visual effects that i never get when using Harmalas, but that's about it.

Psilocin on the other hand, especially in the form of Psilohuasca... Waaaaaaay more visual for me than DMT has ever been, both closed and open eyed visuals. And seeing as how i have done extensive work/experimentation with DMT, and only had a handful or so of experiences with Psilocin so far (with and without MAO-A inhibition/Harmalas/Moclobemide), i can't wait to dive more into Psilohuasca for sure, not only because of the visual aspect but also because so far Psilohuasca seems to take me pretty much to the same places that DMT does.

LSA is the least visually active psychedelic i know. Cannabis can be visual. Especially oral cannabis, but it pales in comparison to tryptamines or phenethylamines.

MDMA is not visual at all, for me. But a whole different class of substance.

I find N2O not very visual either. That is, until you almost black-out. Then you get some visual effects for sure.

But i would go with LSA as the least visual one. Because it definately has some properties of classic psychedelics, but it has almost no visual effects.

It was 60mg of DET and 25mg of aMT, orally in capsules.
DET seemed to me as a light and easy version of shrooms, with main focus in emotional, sensual and auditory area, but some visual activity is still there.

Thanks for the response!

Ok I came across an article by Stephen Szara who was the first person to adminiater DMT to humans intravenously. He suggested 6-Fluoro-Diethyltryptamine (6-FDET) as a good psychedelic placebo. So this substance has the physiological effects but not the visual effects. However, it also seems to lack the psychological effects. Interestingly, it does alegedly still produces mood changes in humans.

Personally, the tryptamine I've taken with the fewest visuals but the strongest psychological effects would probably have to be 4-HO-DiPT.

The problem with MiPT and DiPT for me based on what you're asking is that, similarly to DMT, I find both of them to produce psychological effects that are very deep and therapeutic, but are also very lucid and stable in comparison to the prototypical psychological effects of LSD, more alike phenethylamine psychedelics which I do also very much enjoy and get something out of, but which I'm guessing you don't want based on what you said about MDMA. By contrast, but more similarly to psilocin, I would say that 4-HO-MiPT and 4-HO-DiPT do indeed produce this more prototypical sort of psychological trip.

Of course, 4-HO-MiPT has very powerful visual hallucinations for many, and at least modestly powerful ones for me at almost any dosage. 4-HO-DiPT is quite distinct in this way, having visual hallucinations that are significantly muted and lacking in color compared to 4-HO-MiPT, in the very same sort of way that I find DiPT to compare to MiPT. At the same time, I do find 4-HO-DiPT to produce minor auditory distortions similar to DiPT, but they are far less prevalent and secondary compared to the psychological effects unlike on DiPT. For me, the psychological effects really are the primary component of the 4-HO-DiPT trip, and they have been relatively similar to those of psilocin for me so far, though of course still distinct.

I will note however that 4-HO-DiPT will likely become quite visually hallucinogenic for you if a high enough dosage is taken, as I suspect would be the case with any tryptamine. Even the "psychological effects" of tryptamine psychedelics I find to be inherently connected to certain types of inner hallucinogenic imagery of a more visionary variety that correlates with dissociative and delirious experiences they produce at sufficient intensity. Even 5-MeO-DMT I've often heard mental visions described for, though I haven't tried it myself.

I hope you find what you're looking for either way.

least Visual psychedelic i tried was MDMA.

Tbh I consider cannabis to be a psychedelic, at least in specific areas of the experience. Depending on ROA and/or how much is smoked in a certain timeframe it can certainly be visual to a degree, but I find other areas of the experience to be very psychedelic in their own right. Definitely least visual though when comparing it to the rest of the classic psychs.

That is a quite low dose for MiPT. Generally it seems all simple tryptamines need roughly about 2-3times the DMT dosage.
In proper dosages clearly visual for me.

E.g. MALT is very little visual for me in comparison.



Here it depends seemingly strongly on personal metabolism. For some it can be very visual, for others not at all, and this remains fixed for a certain person. Could be caused by its conversion into 5-HO-DMT, which is known to be very visual, but it seems strange conversion would happen that fast.
But this difference in visual aspect seems to occur in all 5-MeO-trypts (e.g. also for 5-MeO-MiPT), so IMHO it clearly must be a metabolic difference between people, with a visual active metabolite.

The question is always, what you still count as "psychedelic".

E.g. all human trials on LSA have shown no visual effects at all even in very high dosages (be aware that the seeds also have other ergolines in them, which are visual active).

If you really count MDMA as psychedelic, I would also rate it high, as in recommended dosages, MDMA isn't visual. If it gets visual, you take too much...

As I have no experience with DiPT, I can only guess that it likely also isn't much visual, from what I read.