The In Flames Challenge - Thesis

Josh here. First real post - start the In Flames Challenge.

The Challenge:
In case you're not in the know, the Napalm Death Challenge is a thing where, if you're a grindcore or death metal guy, you probably talk about loving Napalm Death, even though Napalm Death isn't consistently that good (GASP!?). Blasphemy, right? No - alot of Napalm Death is thin crusty early-days-of-metal recording or Nu-Metal with Barney Greenway on vocals.

In the Challenge, you listen to every Napalm Death release, taking the good with the bad. Sometimes it's great, some times You Suffer. The point of the Napalm Death Challenge is that it's hard, because Napalm Death is maybe at least as bad as they are good? They invented grindcore, yeah, but it's that thing in business, where someone invents a thing, but then someone gets famous for doing it better: Hydrox vs Oreo, Myspace vs Facebook, Napalm Death vs every Swedish grind band.

Likewise, In Flames is not all epic harmonies and Depeche Mode covers, and I (and Ben) will listen to every In Flames full length records, plus Subterranean and Black Ash Inheritance, which are great and which I own, and see what's good and what's bad.



My Thesis:
In Flames helped invent Gothenburg metal. They're super important and influential and all that. Around Clayman, though, I fell of the In Flames bandwagon. For me, Whoracle and Colony were, and still are, standbys, and responsible  for alot of how I play guitar and write music. The albums before that were and are great, Clayman was and is neutral, Reroute to Remain and on is increasing bad. Have an album called "Sounds of Playground Fading" which sounds like the title of shoegaze Korn kover album.

Around Reroute to Remain, In Flames, either consciously or by coincidence, shifted toward metalcore, which was very popular at the time. They never had huge crucial breakdowns, but they turned almost exclusively to third- and fifthi harmonized Slayer style thrash parts, chug-a-dug verses and clean singing in every song. At the time, there were a thousand bands that did that better, so for me they went from the top of the Gothenburg pile to the middle of the metalcore heap, and so ended my love affair. Unearth, God Forbid and Killswitch Engage were all doing In Flames better than In Flames, and none of them had that sweet Gothenburg nectar.

I always listen to their new songs - sweet opening riff, chug-a-dug verse, evacuate all momentum as the clean chorus swoops in and slows things down. I buy their new albums when I see them used, but the magic is gone.

or WAS gone, maybe. Am I wrong? Is it all a weird confirmation bias? Is In Flames really way better than I'm giving them credit for? Is my one friend, Vin, right, when he says they catch an unfair amount of flak for their later work? On the whole, is their catalog actually not that bad?

I don't think so - I think as soon as I hear Anders' shitty (And it is shitty. Normally I try to articulate it like "I just don't like that, but who can say", but he is not a good singer) clean vocals, I'm going regret this whole thing. But we'll see. I have a couple of albums before I get there. I'll try to stay objective and we'll see how it goes.