contrasting 2C-C and 2C-D

[deff]

Lately I've been exploring 2C-E and love the compound - despite many people saying it can be 'difficult', I find for me it's a very gentle compound although one with very potent effects. One particularly nice effect I've found from 2C-E is the meditative absorption it can induce - I often find myself 'transcending' everything to a level beyond what sober meditation or other psychedelics seem to offer.

I'm really interested in experimenting more with meditation on psychedelics, and have decided to look into one of the "less powerful" 2c-x compounds - either 2C-C or 2C-D to try with meditation. I've read through both main threads on these compounds and they both sound enticing, but I'm finding it hard to get a handle on what the major distinctions between the two are in terms of effects.

I'm interested mostly in a compound that has low to no body load, subtle and malleable mental effects, heightened awareness, and clear-headedness. I'd particularly like to hear from people who have tried both of these compounds and can contrast the effects a little to help clear up any of my confusion of their differences.

I've heard some remark that 2C-C was wonderful with meditation, yet others seem to disagree. 2C-D, from what I've heard, also seems like it might suit this role. Any opinions and recommendations are greatly appreciated, thanks!

 

[Solipsis]

IME 2C-D is absolutely subtle as hell, it does hardly anything really (although I probably havent pushed the limits with it) so in that way its almost more like a nootropic. It may grant you easier access to certain states of being but it requires much of your attention to work with it and get anywhere it seems.
2C-C comes closer to something like 2C-B, definitely psychedelic but the big difference with it that I noticed is that its so super laid-back and relaxing. Honestly, I never knew what total and complete inner stillness was before having ingested 2C-C. Even GHB doesn't get this far and that is saying a LOT.
That quality was touching, especially since it could exist simultaneously with serious visual and tactile activity (so yea tripping). Metallic and synthetic blues and greens were very prominent each time. I could see extreme detail in textures and shades of color, it absorbed me in a calm, kind of dissociating way.
One time, this is my best memory of it, laying down I felt like I was a tropical beach, I was the pristine white sand and could sense crystal clear turquoise water washing over me, the surf that touches the land. It was so peaceful and safe.

Felt like mentioning these experiences since you may notice that - certainly in the right doses - 2C-C feels very meditative to me.

 

[deff]

your 2C-C experiences sound just like what I'd be looking for... out of curiosity, what were the doses you used? thanks

 

[Solipsis]

Most of what I mentioned was with eyeballing
Another time I insufflated about 30 mg, but I definitely think you need to ask other people.

Talking about that, visit the Big & Dandy 2C-C Thread please, and the Big & Dandy 2C-D Thread

You can find these yourself by checking the Essential List now also called Psychedelic Index, the link is found at the top of the main screen of 'Psychedelic Drugs'.
Its a goldmine if I may say so myself. Welcome to BL!

 

[deff]

yeah I've skimmed through both big and dandy threads and found them very informative, but was looking more for a direct comparison between the two by people who have done both (as the effects reported in the main threads seem to overlap with one another)

thanks for the welcome

 

[gravitymonk]

Most of what I mentioned was with eyeballing

[Insert obligatory "please don't eyeball experimental psychedelics" here ]

I actually found 2C-E to be very calm mentally. The physical side-effects became a bit much, especially as I pushed the doses due to tolerance, but it was somewhat dissociative with the right music.

How does 2C-D compare with 2C-E? Aren't they both 4-alkyl-PEAs, or am I way off the mark here?

 

[Delsyd]

IME 2C-D is absolutely subtle as hell, it does hardly anything really (although I probably havent pushed the limits with it) so in that way its almost more like a nootropic. It may grant you easier access to certain states of being but it requires much of your attention to work with it and get anywhere it seems.
2C-C comes closer to something like 2C-B, definitely psychedelic but the big difference with it that I noticed is that its so super laid-back and relaxing. .

that pretty much sums up exactly how i feel about the two.

2c-d does get more psychedelic when the doses are pushed a bit or when you plug it.
So far 2c-d is the only drug ive shoved up my bum, and it was to great effect.

When i plugged 2c-d its effects resembled 2c-e without being as abrasive as 2c-e can be.

 

[Solipsis]

[Insert obligatory "please don't eyeball experimental psychedelics" here ]

I actually found 2C-E to be very calm mentally. The physical side-effects became a bit much, especially as I pushed the doses due to tolerance, but it was somewhat dissociative with the right music.

How does 2C-D compare with 2C-E? Aren't they both 4-alkyl-PEAs, or am I way off the mark here?

2C-D and 2C-E are indeed 4-alkyl-PEAs, 2C-P closes the row.
2C-T-X (i.e. thioalkylated PEAs) bear some resemblance but overall they are a different kind of animal.
Though I recall MGS saying that 2C-T-2 is like 2C-E's retarded younger brother...

I agree that 2C-E is calm mentally in a way and it is known as neutral or centered. But it can also be quite present which IMO takes away from the suitability for meditation. That said, in lower doses I can definitely see it having some potential for it! I'm not at all sure if it would be better than 2C-C/2C-D or not, then...

These kinds of chemicals should definitely not be eyeballed, you are so right about that sir! Though with both 2C-C and 2C-D I did it more certain than I would have been with other 2C-X since they are well known for being among the mildest (the only ones milder might be exoticals like 2C-N or 2C-T-21 if I'm not mistaken or some barely active ones BUT! those are not necessarily mild because of the same reason as 2C-C / 2C-D so I am not suggesting by any means that you would get away by eyeball those!)...
Something like 2C-E I would never ever eyeball, but the difference is stuff like 2C-D has a very slowly inclining dose-response curve. If you would take an inhumane dose then you would definitely pay the piper, but the ceiling effect is not at all immediate lending it the reputation of being mild. Anything less common than like 2C-C or 2C-D I would also not eyeball and to be honest I have hardly ever eyeballed anything in my life.

Anyone reading this should be aware that doing something like this is still irresponsible and a certain type of understanding, extensive experience would be a prerequisite as well as a careful approach. This is often overlooked with sometimes disastrous result.

 

[love_sex_desire]

Thanks for the post Def. I had a similar question, but in more of a recreational context. Since 2C-C and 2C-D are considered "lighter" than other 2C compounds such as 2C-T-7, I was wondering which is more enjoyable for a more social, recreational setting? I'd only be interested in ingesting orally and from what I've researched it sounds like 2C-D is less active orally than 2C-C so would I be wrong to suggest that oral 2C-C ingestion would be more suited for having a good, relaxed, social trip with a few travellers compared to oral 2C-D ingestion?

 

[Solipsis]

Sounds to me like a logical thought..... me, I'm biased since 2C-D could never fully bloom for me with the resources I had, it's probably that if one had enough 2C-D could fulfill pretty much everything 2C-C could. Still, it's more of a long shot and 2C-C remains a fine candidate.

I have to say though that these things are quite complex. It would all depend on a lot of factors, 2C-C being easier is a tad more of a 'sure thing'. Though if one has considerable experience with psychedelics - and I don't want to make this overly heavy - 2C-T-7 has more to offer. It has without a doubt the most any 2C-X has to offer, even (or also) when utilized for recreational purposes it shines. More than 2C-C or 2C-D it shines from within like a completely worthy empathogen. So, is it a better contender? Worse? It depends on many factors that have to do with in its basics set and setting. You decide, not me :D

 

[Jamshyd]

For me, the two are nothing alike. Also, both of them can have a powerful psychedelic effect, even if the visuals don't match those of the deeper psychedelics like LSD.

The thing with people and these two compounds, IMO, is that they don't realize that, more than most other psychedelics, the effects of these two are extremely dose-dependant, making them freaks in a way as somewhat "predictable" psychedelics.

This makes both extremely useful for therapy, IMO.

That said, I would pick 2C-D over 2C-C any day. As a matter of fact, 2C-D is actually my favourite phenethylamine (though I have not yet tried mescaline). 2C-D can be nice for walks in the park at low ("museum") doses, extremely introspective at medium doses, and, and a powerful psychedelic with very unique visual at higher doses.

p.s. I never found 2C-D to be "nootropic" in any way. It is just still active at very low doses that the effect can be very light.

 

[Jamshyd]

Though if one has considerable experience with psychedelics - and I don't want to make this overly heavy - 2C-T-7 has more to offer.

I simply disagree.

I consider myself experienced with psychedelics and 2C-T-7 had nothing to offer me but extreme nausea and semi-psychosis. It actually reminded me of Morning Glory Seeds.

 

[NeuroDr]

Jam, when ur talking about the 2c-d dosages as low, medium, high, what are ur ranges?

 

[Jamshyd]

I try not to give dose recommendations on the internet.

But I'd say something like this: My experience with both substances is on a continuum of 2 - 60mg rectally (the highest I've gone, I think - for oral, double these doses). The effects increase steadily on a sliding-scale between the two dosages, however 2C-C is more skewed toward the end of the range.

 

[deff]

That said, I would pick 2C-D over 2C-C any day. As a matter of fact, 2C-D is actually my favourite phenethylamine

Hmmm... just when I thought 2C-C seemed like the superior choice

I guess I'd really have to try both to see which is better for me... but I only have the money right now to order one...

How is 2C-D as far as stimulating effects? One thing that seems appealing about 2C-C is the relaxation / mild sedation many people mention. Hmmm...

 

[Solipsis]

Yea meaning YMMV.

I think three things are worth holding in mind, that are:
- Jamshyd appears to have tried different doses of all substances than me.
- His CNS works just plain differently
- And last but not least 2C-T-Xs are known for having a remarkable range of results with
people. This baby goes beyond set & setting or simply depends so heavily on it that it all
remains unpredictable.

I have had more therapeutic sessions with my best friend with 2C-T-7 than on LSD and we did plenty of acid together (as well as a sheer abundance of other compounds). We glowed like a lightbulb and shared our most sensitive experience with mutual understanding and without any difficulty.
Yes my first time I had a bout of nausea, but it was worth everything by far.

Actually this only confirms what I said earlier, that these things are not clearcut truths but depend on factors that are pretty much impossible to fathom in prospect. Theres nothing else to do but just try something that sounds good in a responsible way and let your progress depend on the success or failure. If the agent does not fit, try another.
That way Jam found his 2C-D and I found my 2C-T-7. It's still perfectly sound only not in a rigid objective manner but a highly relative and interactive one

 

[Jamshyd]

^ Yes, for sure. YMMV is definitely an important mantra.

deff: I find that 2C-D is more stimulating than 2C-C, however it produces more "clarity" at low-medium doses, something to consider when looking for a meditation aid. 2C-C is a bit more mired, a bit more intoxicating, IME.

I found 2C-D to be quite like TMA-2 actually, which isn't surprising seeing how similar they are chemically.

 

[Solipsis]

I would very much like to try TMA-2

Despite Shulgins reports being a bit weird. But he is one man and even his circle is limited, so I have long since learnt to glance beyond it.

 

[Jamshyd]

^ I tend to take ALL the reports in the Shulgin books with a grain of salt.

Either these people are wired differently than the rest of the world, or they were eating different chemicals altogether, or they polished their reports to suit their bias. A lot of these reports simply don't match the bulk of reports by people who had tried these chemicals afterwards, both in terms of suggested doses and effects. I think this particular case goes beyond YMMV and makes one think a bit.

So much so, that I wouldn't be surprised that if 5-MeO-DET was released in public, many people will not report it as being "psychedelic torture".

Come to think of it, it actually was available for a tiny bit of time several years ago, but never heard any reports about it...

 

[Solipsis]

Do you think the average age differing by about 30-40 (is that right tho?) with many modern time 'psychonauts' could have something to do with it? I say yes, that and the set and setting those differing ages bring with them.

Yes you are permitted to be disgusted by the term psychonaut but it still perfectly defines what the abundance of PD public is involved in.