When should a band be considered old? I ask not because I don't know but because the whole division of young/old distorts pretty much the way music is percieved. So, let's clarify - from young bands we expect development, from old - more of the same. In Flames will be 18 this year and as for which side of the young/old line you wish to place them is a business of your own. Seem to me, thought, that a lot of people out there have problem with that line and this causes a beautiful album like Sounds Of A Playground Fading to be target for some undeserved and often absurd criticism. For example: "They are not heavy enough, they sound like Lady Gaga, and so on..." Weeeeeeel, not! Truth of the matter is that the accent in the album is on the melody. In fact each of the songs has at least one very memorable and recognizable part but that has nothing to do with cliche-driven bubblegum BS that we call mainstream pop for short. And true that the sound is not as raw as in The Jester Race but the riffs in let's say Darker Times and Enter Tragedy kick ass and don't bother taking names. "They are not Death/Metalcore/Someothercore/Whatevercore anymore". It's possible. So? Ever since '93 In Flames enforce their own style on the music world and never stopped doing that. And all the characteristic In Flames elements are found in Sounds of a Playground Fading only more emphasized. The vocal harmonies, the guitar harmonies, the synths, it's all there. You hear a song for the first time and there's no chance to mistake the band. "They are not like they used to be". Same as the above only dumber. Honestly, there probably isn't a week that I don't listen to Come Clarity through and through but when I feel like listening again, I replay it, and not wait for In Flames to re-release it with a new artwork under a different name. And what kind of statement is "They are not like they used to be", how old are you? 91? So open your minds and ears because otherwise you risk on missing on some great music.