# How to get dense muscles?



## RandomBear (Mar 20, 2013)

I know that through low reps you would be able to achieve Myofibrilliar  hypertrophy,but i am not aiming to build strenght but rather to get that dense muscle property e.g mike mentzer type of physique. My question is how should a program that is designed to target myofibrilliar hypertrophy suppose to look like?


----------



## turbobusa (Mar 20, 2013)

Muscle density I believe comes from high intensity training over many years of training. Ever see a 25 yr+ plus vet bber next to a 5 yr training bber ? Most times if both equally lean the older guy will have the hard grainy look from many years of training. Not always though as I knew a masters age guy years agothat was naturally peeled with really low bf year round. When contest preppedhe was absolutley shredded. Thing was he trained low wt low intensity his whole life. His muscles actually looked soft despite being ripped. If he flexed and you felt the muscle it was pretty soft. Now you get that guy thats in his late 30's and up thats been doing it"forever" . The guys with that rock with skin over it look of density are scary hard when flexed. They almost feel "not real" 
they are so hard. I can spot years under the iron quickly at a show.
There are some perks to age in our world . I do think hi intensity training does contribute to the hard dense look. The main thing though is time. 
Look at yates and mentzer thats density. Pretty is more for the younger guys 
no dis there just a different look. Anyway just gabbing  gotta head to the gym. T


----------



## turbobusa (Mar 20, 2013)

RandomBear said:


> I know that through low reps you would be able to achieve Myofibrilliar  hypertrophy,but i am not aiming to build strenght but rather to get that dense muscle property e.g mike mentzer type of physique. My question is how should a program that is designed to target myofibrilliar hypertrophy suppose to look like?



Oh yeah must mention that it's not all hi intensity that contributes as I remember years ago people working "100's" and saying in the long run they became more "dense" in musculature. Not sure if it's true but you may want to investigate,. Of course the gentic factor is there too. I think guys with a high proportion of white fiber get the dense look more so than a guy with high red fiber percentage. Just my.2 
nothing scientific or quotable . My observations only. T


----------



## RandomBear (Mar 20, 2013)

I read in a lot of forums that strength training does contribute to the dense properties of the muscle due to the increased amounts of muscle fiber, so yeah..i was thinking of doing some strength training once every 4 weeks just to get that different hypertrophy and at the same time shock my muscles to grow. So i was wondering how the actual program would look like(sets and reps per workout), what would the split be like(3 days on 1 day off or 4 days on 1 day off) that type of thing.


----------



## Enigmatic707 (Mar 20, 2013)

turbobusa said:


> muscle density i believe comes from high intensity training over many years of training. Ever see a 25 yr+ plus vet bber next to a 5 yr training bber ? Most times if both equally lean the older guy will have the hard grainy look from many years of training. Not always hough as i knew a masters age guy years agothat was naturally peeled with really low bf year round. When contest preppedhe was absolutley shredded. Thing was he trained low wt low intensity his whole life. His muscles actually looked soft despite being ripped. If he flexed and you felt the muscle it was pretty soft. Now you get that guy thats in his late 30's and up thats been doing it"forever" . The guys with that rock with skin over it look of density are scary hard when flexed. They almost feel "not real"
> they are so hard. I can spot years under the iron quickly at a show.
> There are some perks to age in our world . I do think hi intensity training does contribute to the hard dense look. The main thing though is time.
> Look at yates and mentzer thats density. Pretty is more for the younger guys
> no dis there just a different look. Anyway just gabbing  gotta head to the gym. T



x2


----------



## omegachewy (Mar 20, 2013)

Legal me break this simply down in both physiques and physiology. I also dare anyone to contest this because I will have it written up by MIT put associates. 

Muscle strength is related to the cross sectional surface of a muscle. Also known in this alcase as density. It is the limiting factor in the size of any animal bc of the mathematics relation of strength to mass. Mass in terms of muscle is related to volume, which is a cu ic function, as opposed to strength, which is surface and is a square function.

 So to answer your question, train for strength.


----------



## Enigmatic707 (Mar 20, 2013)

omegachewy said:


> Legal me break this simply down in both physiques and physiology. I also dare anyone to contest this because I will have it written up by MIT put associates.
> 
> Muscle strength is related to the cross sectional surface of a muscle. Also known in this alcase as density. It is the limiting factor in the size of any animal bc of the mathematics relation of strength to mass. Mass in terms of muscle is related to volume, which is a cu ic function, as opposed to strength, which is surface and is a square function.
> 
> So to answer your question, train for strength.



Umm, you kinda forgot to mention the efficiency of neuromuscular firing and the effects of mitochondrial proliferation due to increased work output over periods of time.

I like where you're going, but I feel you over simplified and forgot some key points. There is also the point that there in exist the possibility of conversion of muscle fiber types between type2 a and type2 b- again there is a lot of ground to cover in regards to this particular subject.

Another thing to mention is that in all my years I've never seen a study that's sole purpose was to investigate the mechanism of topic.


----------



## omegachewy (Mar 20, 2013)

Yes but the muscle contraction speed,rate etc I feel would have little to do with sheer density of the overall muscle. Be it thicker of thinner fibers, as long as the mass to volume ratio remains relatively constant, density should as well. Ne it a large dense muscle or a small dense one.


----------



## turbobusa (Mar 20, 2013)

omegachewy said:


> Legal me break this simply down in both physiques and physiology. I also dare anyone to contest this because I will have it written up by MIT put associates.
> 
> Muscle strength is related to the cross sectional surface of a muscle. Also known in this alcase as density. It is the limiting factor in the size of any animal bc of the mathematics relation of strength to mass. Mass in terms of muscle is related to volume, which is a cu ic function, as opposed to strength, which is surface and is a square function.
> 
> So to answer your question, train for strength.



Man I wish that it was as easy as coming up with a mathmatical equation to answer questions of this type. You forgot 1 part. Train for strength for a long period of time as in years. 
I don't put much faith in stuff like that . Why would I? Because they said so? You are correct about strength/density. Had an old training partner that could pause 450 -475 on the bench . He was a 165 lber
with 13 inch arms . Would probably dull a scalpal. 
Best thing is to get into the gym and bust ass with training intensity. 
You do it your way I've already done it my way. 
You have been challenged so show me something other than words printed on paper. You don't need to break it down simply . 
I never did much research about research when I was 19 .
Spent my time working and training. I followed the lead of those who went before me. I experimented and found out what works best for me.Thanks, T


----------



## turbobusa (Mar 20, 2013)

One more thing. What is the correlation between slow twitch and fast twitch fibers realtive to muscle density?Can red fiber(fslow twitch be trained successfully into a  dense powerful state ? Can white fiber be trained for endurance?Like to hear your take. T


----------



## Enigmatic707 (Mar 20, 2013)

turbobusa said:


> One more thing. What is the correlation between slow twitch and fast twitch fibers realtive to muscle density?Can red fiber(fslow twitch be trained successfully into a  dense powerful state ? Can white fiber be trained for endurance?Like to hear your take. T



They can be trained to switch yes- that's the short answer
But I really made mention of because there are so many factors involved, not so much that this particular one is of a real significance, but it can play a role and it's worth mention is all.


----------



## Ironbuilt (Mar 20, 2013)

Genetics. And years worth of muscle break down and repair will vary amongst all. Do what fits yourself so long term life longevity can be obtained.

Great thread and all very quality answers or replies guys
.we got some craniums in Anasci..
Thanks ib.


----------



## omegachewy (Mar 20, 2013)

turbobusa said:


> Man I wish that it was as easy as coming up with a mathmatical equation to answer questions of this type. You forgot 1 part. Train for strength for a long period of time as in years.
> I don't put much faith in stuff like that . Why would I? Because they said so? You are correct about strength/density. Had an old training partner that could pause 450 -475 on the bench . He was a 165 lber
> with 13 inch arms . Would probably dull a scalpal.
> Best thing is to get into the gym and bust ass with training intensity.
> ...



im not sure if you took my statement as personal or what man, but it wasn't. Following basic anatomy/physiology combined with physics was all I did. And im trying to have my cake and eat it too by researching and training. So are you asking for pics of how I look? Im dieting down now, if so, will post them in the next pic update. Thursday perhaps when I have a half day of work.


----------



## turbobusa (Mar 20, 2013)

No nothing you said offended me . I get irritated by scientific/muscle 
analysis "findings" sometimes. I've heard most of them over my years. 
You're a good dude and put great effort into expanding your knowledge.
Always a good thing. You're are a very smart guy and I like your writings.
I had just come back from a heavy back session and was my usual 
keyed up wired on endorphins self. Man I'm sorry if I came off dickish.
Not my intention. Not sure bout the pics thing? Pics are cool though.Like seeing 
your countdown/progress. Have a great day. Keep the log going , good read.
Thanks , T


----------



## omegachewy (Mar 20, 2013)

turbobusa said:


> No nothing you said offended me . I get irritated by scientific/muscle
> analysis "findings" sometimes. I've heard most of them over my years.
> You're a good dude and put great effort into expanding your knowledge.
> Always a good thing. You're are a very smart guy and I like your writings.
> ...



I was kind of thinking something along those lines, but just wanted to clarify. Its all good dude. And thank you, I like to consider myself a roided nerd. For me though, I have to have hard facts and science to back anything I do and say. I cant just do as someone says. Ive only done that once, and that was with Mike Arnold and I fully trust him, still scared shitless though. I find people follow broscience way too much though. My goal in bodybuilding is to change to stigma that surrounds us as block heads without a two neurons for a synapse. Plus I know its annoying to see some young guy come in with facts and blah blah saying he knows this and that. I just like to think that since ive been dong this for nine years already I do have more knowledge at my age than the average dipshit lol. 
I do agree though a lot of density comes from time. you just cant beat that muscle maturity giving that hard grainy look us young guys dont have yet.


----------



## thebrick (Mar 21, 2013)

IMO. Muscle density = muscle maturity = consistent heavy intense training + time - BF%


----------



## turbobusa (Mar 21, 2013)

omegachewy said:


> I was kind of thinking something along those lines, but just wanted to clarify. Its all good dude. And thank you, I like to consider myself a roided nerd. For me though, I have to have hard facts and science to back anything I do and say. I cant just do as someone says. Ive only done that once, and that was with Mike Arnold and I fully trust him, still scared shitless though. I find people follow broscience way too much though. My goal in bodybuilding is to change to stigma that surrounds us as block heads without a two neurons for a synapse. Plus I know its annoying to see some young guy come in with facts and blah blah saying he knows this and that. I just like to think that since ive been dong this for nine years already I do have more knowledge at my age than the average dipshit lol.
> I do agree though a lot of density comes from time. you just cant beat that muscle maturity giving that hard grainy look us young guys dont have yet.



Well I know one of my training buds of late has a phd in education
and several lesser degrees in other disciplines. Great guy and smart .
You shoul him see later this yr at nats. Big guy too. six two 300ish and pretty damn lean. I think the old muscles = lack of intelligence is 
only held by most that have hardly ever excercised let alone trained 
at any high level. They might tell you it's just the intellect they care for. Well how dumb is it not to provide a strong durable container to haul that big ole brain around. Fuck the stigma. Truth is nay sayers
just probably could never summon the fortitude and guts that it takes to build a body or move some serious iron. 
Pussy's have a right to point fingers . We have the right to not let it 
get in the way. T


----------



## RandomBear (Mar 21, 2013)

Thanks guys for the great replies. Another thing, what would you guys recommend i do for the strength training?


----------



## Enigmatic707 (Mar 21, 2013)

RandomBear said:


> Thanks guys for the great replies. Another thing, what would you guys recommend i do for the strength training?



That's like asking a group of Christans, Muslims and Jews which religion to follow-


----------



## RandomBear (Mar 21, 2013)

Enigmatic707 said:


> That's like asking a group of Christans, Muslims and Jews which religion to follow-



Well, the reason why i'm asking is because i have never done any strength training before. I have no idea what are the splits,the sets and the reps, the rest intervals and all those stuff and i don't know anyone in real life that has done any strength training either. So i was expecting like a rough guideline to it.


----------



## thebrick (Mar 21, 2013)

Speaking from my own experience, looking back, I think I gained much more density when I started using a more "power" oriented routine. 4-8 reps, heavy as I could go, compound movements (deads, squats, bench). Those truly heavy, intense workouts will fire every muscle fiber you have deep down and you won't have the energy left to buzz away with set after set of the lighter "supplement" movements (cable flyes, etc.). Not there is anything wrong with the other stuff, but build your workout base on the power movements, IMO. With time a stronger muscle is a bigger muscle and over time and with consistency it gets denser.


----------



## Enigmatic707 (Mar 21, 2013)

After I've had a few days to think about this- I'm gonna put my money on protocols that support mitochondrial proliferation and the sustainment of it.


----------



## RandomBear (Mar 21, 2013)

thebrick said:


> Speaking from my own experience, looking back, I think I gained much more density when I started using a more "power" oriented routine. 4-8 reps, heavy as I could go, compound movements (deads, squats, bench). Those truly heavy, intense workouts will fire every muscle fiber you have deep down and you won't have the energy left to buzz away with set after set of the lighter "supplement" movements (cable flyes, etc.). Not there is anything wrong with the other stuff, but build your workout base on the power movements, IMO. With time a stronger muscle is a bigger muscle and over time and with consistency it gets denser.



Would the 4-8 reps be more towards low amount of sets or high amount of sets?


----------



## Enigmatic707 (Mar 21, 2013)

4-8 is low to mid, also depends on intensity and load and time under tension. You can never solely look at rep count or set count... So many factors


----------



## omegachewy (Mar 21, 2013)

I don't mean to give a dickhead answer, but this is something you really need to research. There are basic principles of strength training that are somewhat universal,  but you need to read different protocols and simply try them. No one can tell you which is best for we because we don't know your phenotypic makeup. (How you're put together ie muscle fiber allocation, joint rom, anaerobic threahhold and more)  I would try traditional training with 4-6 reps and 2-3 minutes in between sets. And dontforget to eat big as you lift.


----------



## tripletotal (Mar 22, 2013)

omegachewy said:


> I don't mean to give a dickhead answer, but this is something you really need to research. There are basic principles of strength training that are somewhat universal,  but you need to read different protocols and simply try them. No one can tell you which is best for we because we don't know your phenotypic makeup. (How you're put together ie muscle fiber allocation, joint rom, anaerobic threahhold and more)  I would try traditional training with 4-6 reps and 2-3 minutes in between sets. And dontforget to eat big as you lift.



This^^^

If you ask any good massage therapist, they will tell you that different people have different types of muscle, some of which are dense and hard top penetrate and sooner of which are softer and easier to penetrate.

My girl can grow muscle by just looking at weights, I have to work my ass off just to look like I work out. She has softer, less defined muscles than me and I tend to be leaner and drier more easily. It's based on our muscle fiber makeup.

Not to say that she (or you) couldn't get lean, dry, and dense, but it might take more work.

Unfortunately, experimenting is going to take a fair amount of time. A couple weeks on any protocol isn't really going to tell you anything. I think it was early in this thread that somebody mentioned how many years a lot of the pros have been 100% dedicated to their training to get where they are.

It's all in the journey...


----------



## Zaven (Mar 22, 2013)

RandomBear said:


> Well, the reason why i'm asking is because i have never done any strength training before. I have no idea what are the splits,the sets and the reps, the rest intervals and all those stuff and i don't know anyone in real life that has done any strength training either. So i was expecting like a rough guideline to it.



I would start with a basic Push, Pull, legs routine focusing on compound exercises.   Squats, Deads, Rows, etc.

Right now forget about all the research studies.  Your genetics are gonna dictate things for the most part anyways.  Once you get a good routine stable, THEN you can learn to switch things up, with reps, sets, drop sets, pyramiding, hight intensity, low intensity,  etc.


----------



## Alfie (May 15, 2013)

My objective in muscle building is to modify to judgment that encompasses us as prevent leads without a two nerves for a synapse, Plus I know its frustrating to see some younger guy come in with information and blah blah saying he knows this and that....


----------

