Decoded Magazine presents Simon Shackleton

There are few artists who can claim to have shaped the landscape of electronic music quite like Simon Shackleton. Across more than three decades, the British composer, producer and DJ has consistently refused the confines of genre, crafting everything from euphoric dancefloor anthems under the Elite Force moniker to deeply cinematic compositions that have soundtracked blockbuster films like The Matrix and Spider-Man. Whether delivering marathon six-hour sets at Burning Man or scoring evocative pieces for television, Shackleton’s work is united by an uncompromising spirit of exploration and an ability to find the emotional core within electronic sound.

His latest chapter, The Shadowmaker, represents perhaps his most personal statement yet. Released in 2025, the album weaves intimate songwriting with atmospheric production, exploring themes of resilience and transformation through a lens that’s both vulnerable and powerful. With The Shadowmaker: Reconstructed arriving this September, reimagining these compositions for the dancefloor whilst maintaining their cinematic depth, Shackleton continues to blur the boundaries between electronic music’s various tribes. From his early days with the explosive Lunatic Calm project to his genre-defining tech-funk innovations as Elite Force, he remains that rare artist who can speak to both the underground and the mainstream without compromising his vision.

In this exclusive interview with Decoded Magazine, Simon also presents his CHPTR 002 mix, a sprawling four-hour journey that traverses funk, slomo house, chuggy grooves, nu disco, breaks, electro, tech house, breakbeat and techno. It’s a testament to his ability to weave disparate sounds into a cohesive narrative, demonstrating exactly why his DJ sets have become the stuff of legend. We caught up with Simon to discuss his evolution, his approach to storytelling through sound, and why after all these years, he’s still pushing forward into uncharted territory.

Your 4.5-hour mix ‘CHPTR 2’ represents a significant departure from the typical club format. Given your background scoring films like The Matrix and Charlie’s Angels, how did your cinematic composition experience inform the narrative arc you’ve constructed across these four-plus hours? Were you consciously building acts and movements like a classical composition, or did the storytelling emerge more organically through the selection process?

It may sound like a cliché, but for me, a great DJ set is all about the journey — and trusting the DJ to take you somewhere unexpected. My favourite sets have never been genre-specific; they embrace dynamic shifts, emotional nuance, and a wide range of expression. That’s exactly what I aim for in long-form mixes like CHPTR 2.

Dance music often feels tribal, with DJs sticking to a single style. I’ve always approached things differently — shaped by my background in classical composition and film scoring. Scoring for screen taught me how to underscore emotion, to heighten without overwhelming. That sensibility is baked into how I build these extended sets: organically, but with a clear structure and narrative arc.

So yes, the cinematic experience absolutely informs my process. I’m always seeking emotional depth and a sense of movement, building not just a mix, but a story with a beginning, a middle, and an end.

You’ve described your recent DJ style as “genre-blurring” and “narrative-driven,” exploring a range of genres – like the Funk, SloMo House, Chuggy, Nu Disco, Breaks, Electro, Tech House, Breakbeat & Techno on CHPTR 2 – within a single journey. From a technical mixing perspective, what specific techniques are you employing to create seamless transitions between such disparate tempos and textures? Are you relying more on harmonic mixing, ambient interludes, or entirely reconstructing tracks to serve the broader narrative?

For me, seamless transitions come down to a few key things: harmonic mixing, EQ control, and increasingly, the creative use of cue points.

Harmonic mixing is fundamental to how I structure my sets. I honestly don’t understand how some DJs operate without that musical grounding. It allows for blends that feel natural, even when you’re moving between very different genres or tempos. When I first started DJing, it was all about matching beats – but these days, it’s just as much about matching tone, mood, and energy.

I don’t really rely on ambient interludes or breakdowns to bridge styles. Instead, I do a lot of custom prep work in Rekordbox, especially with cue points – the modern CDJs give you eight, which opens up all kinds of non-linear mixing possibilities. That gives me the freedom to jump between different sections of tracks and re-contextualize them on the fly.

EQ is also hugely important. When you’re blending tracks with very different sonic characteristics – say, a raw breakbeat track into something slick and techy – subtle EQ shifts over time can make those transitions almost imperceptible. Sometimes I’ll start adjusting the EQ a full minute before the blend actually happens, to soften any harsh contrasts.

Ultimately, DJing for me is about storytelling – taking discrete pieces of music and reassembling them into something coherent and emotionally resonant. That’s where the real magic is: finding those unexpected connections and stitching them together into a seamless journey.

After 25 years of producing under aliases like Elite Force and Lunatic Calm, how has your internal sonic palette evolved? What production techniques from your tech-funk pioneering days are you deliberately rejecting or embracing in this more mature artistic phase?

It’s actually been almost 30 years since I launched both Elite Force and Lunatic Calm, so this phase of my career definitely carries more weight and perspective. Back then, I had a classical background and understood music theory well, but I was still learning how to produce electronic music. So much of that era was about getting ideas out despite technical limitations – everything had to be dialed in with very little room for error.

Over time, I learned that great music – especially in the electronic realm – is born in the space between your creative instinct and your ability to realize it sonically. The more you understand every aspect of the production process, the more faithfully you can bring your vision to life.

In those early days, I’d deliver tracks to mastering houses like Abbey Road or The Exchange, and I always made a point to attend the sessions and absorb everything. Those experiences taught me a lot about mix translation and how to bridge the gap between the energy in your head and the version that hits on a dancefloor.

Now, my process is far more refined. I’ve learned to embrace the messiness of the initial creative phase but then shift into an editor’s mindset. That ability to step back, filter through ideas quickly, and identify what’s really working – that’s something I’ve developed over the years and try to pass on through my mentoring.

In terms of what I’ve carried through from the tech-funk days – it’s less about genre and more about attitude. That hybrid mindset, the maverick spirit, the constant need to push boundaries – that still drives me. But sonically, I’ve moved away from certain production tropes that once defined that sound. I want more space in the mix now. More dynamics. More room to breathe. The tools have changed, but the goal is still the same – to make music that hits hard and connects deeply.

Your background includes a Masters in classical composition from Exeter University, yet you’ve spent decades in electronic music production. In this 4.5-hour journey, we can hear both influences converging. How are you applying formal compositional structures to electronic music that traditionally operates on loop-based mechanics? Are you working with specific harmonic progressions or motivic development across the extended timeline?

That’s a really interesting question. I wouldn’t say I’m applying formal compositional structures in any rigid way to electronic music – but the influence is absolutely there, just expressed differently.

Electronic music is often seen as inherently loop-based, and to an extent, that’s true – especially in software like Ableton Live, which I’ve used exclusively for the past 15 years. It’s built around a clip-based workflow, which naturally leans into repetitive, modular ideas. But for me, the creative challenge lies in blurring the rigidity of those 8- or 16-bar loops to build something that feels fluid and story-driven.

I approach that in a few ways. I use lots of automation – filters, reverb sends, delay throws – to create movement and flow. These tools are great for dissolving the sharp edges of loops and creating sonic transitions that feel more like arcs or phrases than repeated cells. I also use the linear arrangement view which allows you to see the bigger picture from the start.

I’m also a big fan of using analogue-style sounds – there’s a warmth and imperfection in how acid lines evolve that feels incredibly organic, and opening a filter slowly over time can be a powerful way to guide the listener through a section without relying on traditional chord changes.

Beyond that, I’m always thinking about the listener’s journey. Even if I’m not following classical forms, I’m still working with ideas of expectation, tension and release, of motifs and development. Sometimes those motifs are melodic, sometimes they’re harmonic or rhythmic, and sometimes they’re textural – maybe even tied to a certain delay effect or sound design element that reappears across different tracks in the mix.

Ultimately, I think the linear nature of music – the fact that it unfolds over time – is what ties my background in classical composition to what I do now. Whether it’s a symphony or a 4.5-hour DJ mix, the job is the same: to take people on a journey where every twist and turn feels intentional.

The mix features several of your own reconstructions and unreleased material. Can you walk us through your current studio setup and how you’re approaching the reconstruction of older tracks? Are you working entirely within the box now, or are you still incorporating the hardware elements that defined your earlier Elite Force productions? What’s your philosophy on updating classic material for contemporary sound systems?

Over the past few years, I’ve been in a bit of a transitional phase. After moving from the UK to Denver in the US, and going through some personal shifts, I knew I wasn’t going to have a fixed studio space for a while. So I made the decision to fully embrace a mobile setup – just a MacBook, a solid audio interface, and a great pair of Audeze headphones.

I used to really struggle with room acoustics. Like most producers, I’ve spent years battling bad monitoring environments and making poor mix decisions because of it. The problem is, if you can’t trust what you’re hearing in your room, then you can’t trust the choices you’re making. That’s what pushed me to learn how to produce and mix entirely on headphones – and honestly, it’s one of the best things I’ve ever done.

These days, I don’t even have my speakers plugged in. I might check a mix on laptop speakers or my phone or in the car, but 95% of the time I’m working in headphones. It gives me total consistency, whether I’m in my studio or on the move. I can work on a plane or in a hotel and still have the exact same listening environment. The only difference at home is I’ve got a bigger monitor for visual space.

As for the Reconstructions and older material – I’m constantly revisiting tracks I’ve made, looking for new ways to reframe them. It’s not just a case of updating sounds or mixing louder for modern systems – it’s about reinterpreting the emotional core of the track and pushing it somewhere new. Learning to resample and manipulate my own material with fresh ears has become a big part of my process.

Ultimately, my philosophy is this: just because something worked 20 years ago doesn’t mean it’s finished. I see these pieces as evolving entities. If I can bring new energy or deeper feeling to them, I will.

You’ve mentioned that this represents a step away from “the formula of the dancefloor single” towards broader brushstrokes. From a technical standpoint, how are you approaching the mastering and dynamics across four-plus hours? Are you maintaining consistent loudness throughout, or are you intentionally creating dynamic peaks and valleys that mirror the emotional journey you’re crafting?

I’ve recently been working on a remix album based on songs from The Shadowmaker. The original album was very much in the singer–songwriter realm – it sat somewhere between Nine Inch Nails, Billie Eilish, Portishead and maybe even a little Bowie/Pink Floyd. It was song-led, but with a strong electronic backbone.

So when it came to remixing those tracks, it wasn’t about chasing dancefloor bangers – it was about reinterpretation. I’ve always believed that a song can exist in multiple forms. A live band might play it one way. A remix might strip out everything except the vocal and build something entirely new around it. That kind of creative shapeshifting really appeals to me.

As for dynamics across four-plus hours – yes, I very consciously build peaks and valleys into the mix. I don’t aim for constant LOUDNESS throughout, because it would completely flatten the emotional arc. Some of my favourite tracks in this mix are actually the hardest to fit in, because they’re delicate or awkward or just don’t play nice with other tunes. But I’m totally happy to spend 20–25 minutes building the context so that one track can shine at exactly the right moment.

I think that’s crucial – especially over such a long journey. You’ve got to manage the emotional energy. You can’t hit people over the head with intensity for four hours straight. It becomes meaningless. It’s like great filmmaking – tension, release, contrast, pacing – all of that matters.

To me, a long-form mix like this is about narrative. You need to allow space to exhale. You need stillness so that impact can exist. And when you treat the whole thing with that kind of care, you’re not just delivering a set of tracks – you’re taking people somewhere.

Your epic open-to-close sets under the One Series brand have become legendary. How does curating a recorded mix differ from reading a live room? Are you missing the immediate feedback loop of a crowd, or does the studio environment allow for more precise sonic storytelling that wouldn’t be possible in a club context?

It’s definitely different. Curating a recorded mix gives you a lot more control – you can focus on precision, fine-tune transitions, and sculpt something sonically rich without the unpredictability of a live environment. In a club, there’s always chaos – monitoring can be hit or miss, gear malfunctions, unexpected energy shifts – you have to roll with it.

Lately, I’ve been experimenting with using in-ear monitors for DJing, much like I use headphones in the studio. It gives me a consistent sound regardless of the booth setup, and it’s easier on the ears too. That said, you do miss the real-time feedback loop from the crowd. At the end of the day, DJing is about communication – and when there’s a room full of people responding to what you’re doing, that connection feeds you. It pushes you creatively.

With the One Series or CHPTR shows, I usually prepare quite meticulously. But once you’re in the room, things inevitably shift. You have to be responsive. I remember one One Series show at Public Works in San Francisco – I’d prepared a slow, gear-building journey starting around 100 BPM. But by 9:15, the floor was packed and people were ready to go off. So I had to pivot – while still pacing things carefully so they weren’t burnt out by 10:30.

With a recorded mix, you’re freed from those external pressures – there’s no “tempo of the night” to manage. You can just focus on building something cohesive and emotionally resonant, without compromise.

The Shadowmaker project represents your most personal work to date, incorporating your own vocals and stream-of-consciousness narratives. How much of that introspective approach has influenced the track selection and mixing style in this 4.5-hour journey? Are we hearing Simon Shackleton the person, rather than Elite Force the DJ persona?

Well, this particular four-and-a-half-hour journey is quite funky and disco-infused – which is something I’ve been wanting to explore for a long time. The reason it sounds that way is because it began life as a live set for a small group of people at a 4th of July block party here in Colorado. It was a daytime mix, and I wanted it to reflect that – something warmer, with a sunnier disposition. Compared to CHPTR 001, I’d say this one is more upbeat, more groove-led, and built for a different kind of energy.

As for The Shadowmaker and how that introspective approach influenced this mix – I’d say not much, directly. That project was deeply personal and intentionally vulnerable. It gave me a creative space to express emotions that don’t always have a place on the dancefloor. That said, I do think that finding that voice – one that’s not tethered to genre or expectation – has had a lasting impact on how I approach music overall.

So while CHPTR 002 doesn’t carry the same emotional weight as The Shadowmaker, it’s still an honest reflection of who I am – just a different facet. In both cases, it’s Simon Shackleton the person coming through – but seen through different lenses.

Given your extensive background in music for installations, film, and television, you understand how sound functions in different contexts. How are you approaching the mix for listeners who might experience it through headphones versus those playing it through proper sound systems? Are you making specific EQ choices that serve both contexts, or is there a preferred listening environment you’re targeting?

I wouldn’t say I’m making specific EQ choices tailored to either headphones or big sound systems – nor do I have a preferred listening environment in mind. That said, I can absolutely imagine people putting this on while they’re getting ready for a night out, cruising around in the car, or playing it on a proper system in the background of a gathering. I think it holds up well across a variety of contexts.

When it comes to EQ and how the overall mix sounds, my main focus is always on creating a seamless, fluid journey – something long-form and narrative-driven that draws you in and holds your attention. I’m not thinking in terms of different EQ strategies for different listening setups – just the right choices for the mix itself. A good sound system should be calibrated with plenty of headroom, and I’m always careful not to run things too hot at the front of house, because I want to maintain the highest possible sound quality.

With most of my DJ mixes, I do very little post-EQ. I’ll do a bit of mastering at the end just to make sure levels are consistent throughout – because naturally there are going to be peaks and dips across a 4.5-hour timeline – but otherwise I keep it minimal. It’s more about crafting a cohesive whole than tailoring it to one particular playback scenario.

You’ve been witnessing electronic music’s evolution for over three decades, from the underground break culture through the Dance Music explosion to the current streaming landscape. As an artist who’s maintained relevance across multiple eras, what do you see as the role of the extended DJ mix in 2025? Is this extended format a response to short attention spans, or are you trying to reclaim the deeper listening experience that’s been lost in playlist culture?

I think the extended DJ mix still has a huge amount of relevance, especially for people who’ve grown up valuing the craft of DJing, the arc of a proper journey, and the emotional depth you can tap into when you stretch out over time. There’s definitely been a cultural shift toward short-form content and instant gratification, but I think there’s a growing desire to push back against that too. Not everyone wants disposable 45-minute sets or algorithm-driven playlists. Some people still want to immerse themselves in a deeper, more intentional listening experience.

My earliest DJ sets were five-hour marathons, often wildly eclectic – mixing everything from Belgian new beat to acid house, Nirvana, loping indie grooves, and bands like Curve. Back then, it was common to see DJs play for three, four, even five hours. That format allowed for true trust between the crowd and the DJ – a chance to let go and be taken somewhere unexpected. That trust is a beautiful thing, and it’s something I try to honour with these CHPTR mixes.

In 2025, there’s just so much music out there, and with that comes a near-infinite number of stories to tell. I still dig constantly – always looking for oddball breakbeats from house producers or deeper cuts that fall through the cracks. That kind of crate-digging feels more rewarding now than ever.

With CHPTR, I’m also trying to lean into the idea of presence – of actually being there with the music and not viewing the dancefloor through a phone screen. So much of electronic music performance has become hyper-visual, and while I’ve worked with amazing visual teams like All Of It Now for my One Series shows, I’m cautious of the music becoming just an underscore for flashy visuals. I’d love to see more people engaging with the sound and the room itself – less documentation, more experience.

In the end, I’m just trying to make the kind of musical experience I’d want to hear. And if that resonates with even a small pocket of people who crave something deeper and more immersive, then it’s worth every second.

by Damion Pell

• Share
• Tweet
• Pin it
• Share
• Email
• More