Thanks for proving my point
But no, seriously, take away the vocals at this point in time and the In Flames sound is dead.
I'm gonna shoot straight here - right now, Anders
is the In Flames sound. That's how important he is. Thinking about it, maybe that's why such huge attention is focused on him. It's probably why he gets scrutinized so much, and his vocals and lyrics so carefully analysed. It is his vocals that now make the "In Flames sound". It certainly isn't the guitars.
Jesper left - he's replaced, the In Flames sound, so to speak, still exists on SOAPF.
Take away Anders, that sound is gone imo. If Anders ever left the band, In Flames would be more or less dead. It wouldn't be In Flames anymore.
It sounds like I'm digitally sucking Anders dick here and that's not the case
i'm more critical of him than a lot of people, but only because for his older work I have a huge amount of respect, and I guess a big part of me knows if Anders changes too much or leaves entirely the In Flames sound, for me, would be finished.
Show somebody In Flames without vocals from 1996 to 2000 and they'd probably be able to identify the band, or at least get close to it with a few guesses. Post-2000 that would be much harder to do.
Give somebody Colony/Clayman/R2R [instrumental album] and STYE/ASOP [instrumental album] and they would never guess it was the same band. However, as soon as you add in the vocals they'd go "oh yeah, it's In Flames".
So yeah, much like LP are defined nowadays by their vocals, so are In Flames. It's incorrect and even hypocritical to suggest otherwise.