High reps for definition. A weight lifting myth?

Been working out for… about 17 years, off and on and am still a pretty lean/ not so big guy.
The general philosophy you hear is that to build mass you lift heavy weights, low reps and for definiton you lift low weight for more reps.

Was reading here that this may not be true. What the author of this website suggests is quite contrary to the generally accepted logic:

This makes sense to me, at least. Definition is more the product of lack of fat rather than muscle growth. So is high weight/ low reps + lower calorie diet and cardio the way to go for increased size and definition?

So anyone have an informed opinion on this? I’m about to embark on a new workout regimen and figured I’d see if you guys had any thoughts on the matter.

High to medium weight is definitely the way to go for size. If you’re already doing a workout like this and you want more definition, then altering your diet will do it for you. You don’t necessarilly have to do cardio (unless you’re genetically unfortunate and just can’t burn fat without it). If you’re looking to acheive as much mass as possible I would skip the cardio. If you’re looking for more definition but don’t want to change your eating habits then cardio will definitely help.

It’s definitely a myth. From here:

Here are a couple articles you might be interested in:

Different Destinations, Different Journeys

Program Design 101

Thanks for the info/ links, ultrafilter & x-ray vision!

Much appreciated!

Couple thoughts:

-It’s really, really tough to get big and increase your definition at the same time. Pick one, go for it for a while, then work on the other while trying to maintain what you’ve done.

-It’s important to be in decent aerobic shape no matter what. If you’re worried that cardio will cut into your size gains (and there are a lot of people who aren’t), look into interval training.