The terms I've been using lately are "professional" sound and "audiophile" sound.

Professional sound means sound with no obvious problems. There is no buzz or hum, the room echo and background noise are minimized, and the end result has reasonable equalization. You can get all that with a fairly inexpensive mic that is used well.

Audiophile sound has all that, plus that wonderful combination of edge without sounding distorted, and creaminess without sounding soft. There is a richness and luster that can generally only be achieved with top mics. That said, with judicious use of EQ, compression/expansion, and an exciter, one might be able to fake it. (I can't.)

Not everybody needs audiophile sound. In fact, if you're making a Jackass-type YouTube video, non-professional sound might come across as more authentic. If you're filming for the big screen, go for audiophile sound. If you can afford the gear, get audiophile equipment. But frankly, for most of our applications, professional-level sound will get the job done without making anybody unhappy.

IMHO, the very word "audiophile" has been thoroughly tarnished by the "golden-ears", "magic cable" crowd. The biggest difference between (genuine) audiophile equipment and professional equipment is not necessarily the specs. It is the build quality, the functionality, the packaging, the user interface, and mostly the reliability, ruggedness, dependability, and consistency.

And that is consistent with the Fast / Good / Cheap model...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...iangle.svg.png

Project triangle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fascinating variety of responses
My own 2 cent (euro cent)

As per the original question , a move towards premium quality ... well that requires a professional sound mixer regardless of kit ...... the Camera operator has enough to do between lights , talent ,framing etc etc (and will locate the interview with visual considerations not aural ones) and will never give sound the time and consideration it requires .... thats if you want premium quality

Secondly , yes Lavs will get you clear concise sound (if placed properly without cable noise and RF interference) but they always sound flat to me, too little room ambience and from experience the chances of a single operator with a lav shooting atmos are pretty slim (the old school guy who trained me hated radios with a passion so maybe some of thats rubbed off)

But then even a boom on a stand becomes just another piece of kit often just thrown in by single operators

Honestly think you should just hire someone for your shoots ( and my favourite indoor mic on a boom is the, unmentioned so far, Senn MKH50 but it needs to be very focussed)

So true about audiophiles and "magic cables"!

Personally, my definitions are a bit different. Consumer gear is plastic, non-rugged, lacks a case, etc. Professional gear is solid, robust, transportable, etc. The sound is good without obvious problems. "Audiophile" (to me) adds truly great sound. The specs should look solid, but the ears should experience something special. Maybe a better term would be "elite", since "audiophile" is a loaded term.

In any case, I'm not one to worry about the specific terms. Levels 1, 2, and 3 are fine by me.

Lenses are similar. There is plastic junk out there, some solid, reliable glass, and some lenses that are truly special. And the truth of the matter is that you can take an award-winning photo with a plastic junk lens if you are in the right place at the right time and apply solid skills - and if it doesn't break. A pro lens will get the job done time and time again. An elite lens might add corner to corner perfection, great bokeh, or artistic flare or some combination of traits that is tough to achieve with lesser glass.

The interesting thing about elite products is that one has to take personal preference into account. You might value bokeh while I might value flare or corner sharpness. I might want my mics to have an edge, while you might want yours to have super smooth sound. In any case, it should be something that the owner can see or hear clearly. If it's as subtle as a magic digital cable, it's not truly elite.

Sanken Follow Up
 

Wow, figured this little thread would die a quiet death while I was off shooting my many interviews in "live" locations with minimal ability to control the situation....but looks like I was wrong :)

I did buy the Sanken CS3e mic from Guy Cochran. Great price (dvinfo dudes discount) but more importantly Guy called and took serious time to bring me up to speed. Thanks Guy!

The results, while not a head to head trst with other great mics, have been beyond my expectations. As advertised; exceptional ability to screen out lively indoor ambient noise and home in on the speakers voice. 10 interviews in wildly different locations, all indoors, and many many times during the interviews there would be a noise that I could easily hear. I turned to my audio tech who was listening with headphones expecting her to say "retake" and instead got a thumbs up to drive on with the interview. The Sanken is pretty tough too, my gaffer knocked over the mic boom and it hit the deck hard but worked fine despite the fall.

To me this mic avoids the "audiofile vs real world listeners" debate by making an audio track that's noticeably better - on any listeners system. Of course for the true audio geeks among us - all of the above is probably meaningless without another mic recording parallel for comparison. I get that for sure but live in a very imperfect world where I needed a ambient taming mic asap. Very happy with the Sanken :)

Will post several clips of the 5DM2 on board mic vs the Sanken. Again, certainly a straw man comparison but informative none the less in that you can really hear all the crap this mic make go away.

Thanks again to all of you for the ongoing wisdom and guidance :)