dumbbells or barbells? i have to buy just one of these, which

>her name is Ching Pong Rice Dogstew

buy both you cheap bastard, and a power rack

>>37224720

is a gym an option?

>>37224771
no, i want to start in my home pls

>>37224810
barbell is overall better, but do get at least squat stand and bench as well, and gains will be on your way

>>37224810
>>37224971
I disagree, dumbbell offers far more flexibility and options, and far more isolation

You should definitely try to find a set of dumbbell and barbell bars and a set of weights, rather than buying 1 of each, but if you're just starting out then honestly it doesn't really matter which you chose at the end of the day.

>>37225396
What about for chest and shoulders?

I feel like I only starting seeing gains using barbell bench and barbell OHP, mainly due to the control

>>37224720
If you HAVE TO choose, barbell is the only choice that makes sense. For two reasons:

a) You can always change the load so it's appropriate to the exercise you're doing. That's not something you can do with dumbbells - using dumbbells only you'd have to buy a whole set, which is incredibly expensive, or get adjustable ones, which suck.

b) You can't really train your lower body properly using dumbbells. You gain strength much too quickly.

>>37225710
>adjustable dumbbells suck
why

Given that a complete dumbbell rack costs on the order of 3-4 times as much as a barbell, rack and weights you're probably better off with buying the barbell set and a bunch of gear.

>>37226138
Not him but they're fragile, potentially dangerous and expensive. Not to mention the limited weight.

>>37224810
>i want to start in my home pls
If you are an absolute noob you've better start in a gym. "Self-taught" lifters looking at goddamn youtube tutorials are the worst.
Usually any gym has some supervising PTs who will check your form (for free). At least you won't visit snap city before even beginning.
You don't even have a clue about dumbbells and barbells FFS.
Anyway, dumbbells can replace and are better than barbell until you can lift more than lmao1pl8 (the max weight for dumbbells is usually 35kg, unless you purchase adjustable dumbbells). You use more stabilizers; you're forced to keep a better focus on form and to better control the weight.

>>37225710
>a) You can always change the load so it's appropriate to the exercise you're doing. That's not something you can do with dumbbells - using dumbbells only you'd have to buy a whole set, which is incredibly expensive, or get adjustable ones, which suck.
Doesn't make sense. Utterly wrong.
>b) You can't really train your lower body properly using dumbbells. You gain strength much too quickly.
And this is simply retarded.

>>37226306
>Doesn't make sense. Utterly wrong.

It does though. Check the dumbbell rack in your gym. It will likely be graduated in 2-2.5kg (or 4-5lb) increments. Good luck progressing on OHP adding 5kg every workout.

As for price just check EliteFTS. A complete dumbbell rack costs thousands of dollars. You could buy a good barbell, bench, rack and enough weight to get you well into intermediate training for less than the cost of the dumbbells alone.

>>37226306
Only sensible reply.

>weight for dumbbells is usually 35kg
There are 45kg in my gym, I use them for farmers walks.

>>37224720
Not doing compounds never going to make it

>>37225396
wew lad, how's your gains tho? you can't do compounds with dumbbells, and they're far superior over isolation exercises, try pricing me wrong
>protip: you can't

>>37225479
Shoulders I'd agree with, I did arnold presses for a while with noticable benefits to my delts, but after adding barbell OHP I'm noticing more strength.

Chest, definitely not. Dumbbells are far better for chestpress. Flyes are best on a cable machine, then dumbbells, then barbell. Dips seem to be the king of chest movements though.