{"id":7565,"date":"2026-09-24T04:56:33","date_gmt":"2026-09-24T04:56:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/silvybrand.com\/?p=7565"},"modified":"2026-09-24T04:56:33","modified_gmt":"2026-09-24T04:56:33","slug":"ray-ban-meta-audio-glasses-meta-connect-2026","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/silvybrand.com\/?p=7565","title":{"rendered":"Meta ditches the camera on its newest smart glasses"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Walking around Meta Connect 2026, everyone\u2019s sporting smart glasses in all sorts of shapes, colors, and sizes. It\u2019s a marked difference here, a tech bubble where \u201cpervert glasses\u201d are not a concern.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Outside Connect, the public backlash against wearable surveillance tech \u2014 a catchall term that encompasses not just smart glasses, but also smartwatches and AI pendants \u2014 is gaining steam. So it\u2019s incredibly curious timing that this year, the company is launching Ray-Ban Meta Audio Glasses: smart glasses infused with Meta AI, but with no camera for recording others.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

To hear Meta tell it, that\u2019s a coincidence. Audio-only glasses have been years in the making.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cThree years ago, it wasn\u2019t clear if AI glasses were going to be a thing. Back then, every other company was backing out of the space,\u201d says Alex Himel, Meta\u2019s vice president of wearables. \u201cThen two years ago, we saw that audio was the top use case, the biggest potential for AI, and that it should work well in a pair of audio glasses.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"There<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

There are multiple combinations of colors and lenses across two styles for the audio-only glasses. Clubmaster is in the middle here, sandwiched between two Burbanks.<\/em><\/figcaption>Photo by Brett Putman \/ The Verge<\/cite><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Himel has a point. Open-ear audio is the least controversial part of the Ray-Bans \u2014 and the thing everyone can agree is convenient. Plus, the camera-less glasses are<\/em> lighter. Himel says that by removing the cameras, Meta could \u201crearchitect\u201d the glasses. \u201cThat allowed us to take a lot of electronics out of the front frame and have a lot more design flexibility.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The audio-only models start at 43 grams \u2014 heavier than normal wire-frame glasses, but noticeably lighter than the roughly 50g Ray-Ban Meta Gen 2<\/a> and the 69g Meta Ray-Ban Display<\/a>. The arms are thinner. They come in two styles: the Mad Men-<\/em>esque Clubmaster and the more Wayfarer-reminiscent Burbank. The hinges extend for wider faces; the temple arms and nose pads are adjustable. There are 23 color and lens combinations, and they can support the same wider prescription range as the Ray-Ban Meta Optics lineup<\/a>. Even more so than the standard Meta Ray-Bans, these look and wear<\/em> like normal glasses. And with a $349 starting price, they\u2019re cheaper too.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Free of a power-hungry camera, the battery lasts an estimated 12 hours on a single charge. The most technical things you can do with them are interact with Meta AI, take phone calls, and listen to podcasts or music. And that\u2019s it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"I<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

I think Clubmaster looks fetching on me. But these look like ordinary glasses. <\/em><\/figcaption>Photo by Victoria Song \/ The Verge<\/cite><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

\u201cThey don\u2019t record,\u201d Himel says. \u201cThe only thing they do, which is the same thing as an Alexa device in your house or some other devices, they\u2019re just listening for a specific wake word. They\u2019re not sending anything \u2026 If they hear [the wake word], then they start listening to what you\u2019re saying. When you\u2019re done talking, then it\u2019s processing, and that\u2019s visible to the AI. It gets processed, and that\u2019s kind of it.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Slipping them on, they\u2019re comfortable and, I think, quite fetching on me. Regardless of how one might feel about Meta<\/a>, it\u2019s fair to guess most people would feel less like a creeper wearing these.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Meta Glasses and Ray-Ban Meta Gen 3<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n

I feel differently slipping on the new Ray-Ban Meta Gen 3. Partly because the camera is back in play, partly because the pair Meta gives me is the new aviator style with transition lenses. I\u2019m told I can pull it off, but I keep asking my colleague Jay Peters if I\u2019m giving \u201980s serial killer vibes. The other new style is called Zena \u2014 not the warrior princess \u2014 and it\u2019s a bolder, geometric cat-eye frame.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The third-generation glasses feature fairly minor refinements. There\u2019s a sixth microphone, compared to the second generation\u2019s five, for clearer phone calls. Battery life has gotten a slight boost to nine hours, an hour longer than the second gen. The temple arms, like the audio-only glasses, are adjustable for a better fit. All sound will now be captured in Dolby Atmos for spatial audio. Sure! That\u2019s neat if I\u2019m in my quiet hotel room, but it\u2019s harder to appreciate when reviewing footage amid the hustle and bustle of Meta Connect. The new model comes in 27 color and lens combinations, plus three seasonal options.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Along with the hardware changes, the Gen 3 glasses are also getting a price bump. They start at $449, up from $379 for the second-gen models last year.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"Teehee,<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Teehee, is this 80s serial killer vibes or\u2026<\/em><\/figcaption>Photo by Brett Putman \/ The Verge<\/cite><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Meta Glasses \u2014 the off-brand, more affordable entry-level glasses launched a few months ago \u2014 also<\/em> have more options. There are two new styles, Capri and Nova. Capri is some kind of cat-eye shape, while Nova\u2026 honestly, the styles are all starting to blur together. They\u2019re round and remind me of several other Ray-Ban Meta glasses, but slightly<\/em> different. There\u2019s a new ivory-colored Kylie Jenner pair that costs $399.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But maybe Kylie Jenner isn\u2019t the celebrity collab you\u2019ve been dreaming about. That\u2019s fine. Because Blackpink\u2019s Lisa \u2014 a K-pop icon and The White Lotus <\/em>actress \u2014 also<\/em> has Meta Glasses. They have pink lenses and come with a blind-box-type charm styled after Lisa\u2019s pets. These also start at $399. (Non-celebrity versions of the Meta Glasses start at $249.)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Why the celebrity collabs? Options for more people, including women.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"Blackpink<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Blackpink (glasses) in your area.<\/em><\/figcaption>Photo by Victoria Song \/ The Verge<\/cite><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

\u201cWith the Meta Glasses Starfire with Kylie, we saw a younger, more female audience start to buy the glasses,\u201d says Himel. \u201cWayfarer is the most popular glasses type in the world, but it tends to be more male \u2014 though definitely not exclusively male. The second brand we did was Oakley \u2026 but Oakley [also] tends to be a more masculine brand. So I think with Kylie and Lisa, and with more styles, we\u2019re seeing them appeal to more women.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

There are actually more<\/em> limited-edition versions, styles, colors, and prescription permutations available across the entire existing Ray-Ban Meta lineup at a whole range of price points. I suspect I\u2019d need to make a spreadsheet to list them all. While scuttling about Meta\u2019s campus this week, I\u2019m brought to an entire area where they\u2019re all displayed. It looks like a high-end store for, regular, schmegular glasses. That, I suspect, is the whole point.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

All around the campus, there are life-size cutouts of Meta\u2019s cuddly Muse mascot. That\u2019s because Muse, Meta\u2019s recently released personal AI agent, is coming to the seemingly 4,000 iterations of Meta smart glasses that now exist.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cMuse is gonna be everywhere,\u201d confirms Himel. \u201cMuse is gonna be on every device that we make.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The pitch for Muse in your glasses is that your AI assistant will better remember your context and do things on your behalf. During a demo, I ask a Muse agent to help me buy snacks that will give me the best protein bang for my calorie buck. It can do it, but fails at adding another snack to my cart. Obviously, this is an early-stage demo, and there are always kinks. I can see the shape of how this could be helpful. I can also see how it\u2019d be a treasure trove of data for Meta.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Less contentious is a demo of a new FDA-cleared hearing assistance feature. I\u2019m asked to wear earplugs to mimic mild hearing loss. Things sound a bit muddled. With the feature turned on, higher voices gain a tinny quality as the AI works to boost conversational tones in a semi-loud environment. After about five minutes, I\u2019ve forgotten I have earplugs in. Adding this capability will cost an extra $149, but I\u2019m told it\u2019s FSA\/HSA eligible and designed to be a one-time fee versus an ongoing subscription.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"The<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The Nova glasses<\/em>!<\/figcaption>Photo by Brett Putman \/ The Verge<\/cite><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Lastly, there are two minor privacy updates \u2014 though neither truly addresses the fears people have been debating this past summer. The first is bringing the same \u201cprivate processing\u201d pipeline<\/a> used on WhatsApp to wearables. It\u2019s a server-based system in which a user\u2019s data is inaccessible to Meta or any other third parties when end-to-end encryption isn\u2019t possible or on-device processing isn\u2019t powerful enough.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cIt\u2019s so that you know that your data is just yours and you\u2019re the only one who has access to it. Other companies have taken an approach to everything on-device. We do a lot on-device. But the problem with just doing things on-device is that the device is only so powerful and capable. And so if you want to run more capable models and get better functionality, we want to offer the same privacy protections, but with more capabilities. So that\u2019s what private processing is,\u201d says Himel.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Meta will also roll out an update where users can opt out of their visual data being used for AI training. (Audio-only queries are still used for training.)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

That\u2019s progress but doesn\u2019t really address people\u2019s primary concerns about the glasses being used to covertly record people in public. Himel also acknowledges that the private processing feature is mostly about protecting the data of the person wearing the glasses.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Meta\u2019s goal at Connect this year is to bombard everyone with options. By the end of the year, Meta expects to have over 100 versions of its glasses. The more versions of its glasses, the more people they\u2019ll reach. The more AI updates that trickle to each of these iterations, the faster Meta can stake its claim on the next era of mobile computing.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

So goes the theory. But providing hardware options isn\u2019t Meta\u2019s problem. Inside the safe bubble of Meta\u2019s campus, everyone wears these glasses. The issue is outside<\/em> Menlo Park, where a vocal contingent isn\u2019t asking for more. They\u2019re asking for less.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Follow topics and authors<\/strong> from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.<\/span><\/p>\n