Extensive testing reveals that no matter the wailing and gnashing of teeth claiming digital sucks, no one can actually tell the difference in a double-blind test.
Theory is indeed useless when reality doesn't agree. Every real scientist knows this. An engineer's job depends on it. I invite audiophiles to add that bit of wisdom to their own thinking.
I intentionally avoid using lavalier mics. Their amplitude and timbre are all over the place depending on the direction you're looking, they pick up clothing noise, and you're either tethered to a wire or have to deal with the complexity and limitations of a wireless system.
Headsets work better overall, but are highly visible and still add a layer of complexity. They also sound like someone talking directly into your ear. Even with additional postprod [going all the way to room modeling], I've never managed to make a headset sound totally natural. If others have, I'd appreciate some tips.
In any case, as someone who spent ten years dealing with lavs and headsets in live performance as a sound engineer, I avoid them in my own time as much as humanly possible
The stereo image was intentional, it's a trick for removing perceived echo/reverb by spreading it out across a stereo image instead of it all piling up right behind the voice in mono. That said, the image was wider than I'd have liked. That was a result of mic placement and angle, another tradeoff to avoid wide amplitude changes as I moved around.
FWIW, several other video producers wrote me to ask how I got such great sound without a lav, and (like you) others wrote to mention that they found the very wide stereo distracting. I'll tinker with it more in the next vid.
Remember to say hello to your bank teller.
