I've read and heard that it's an axiom (assuming that axiom is the correct word) in low budget filmmaking that audiences can sit through "poor" visuals and easily accept the lousy visuals as ... part of the aesthetic whole.
BAD SOUND ... especially lousy sound that makes dialogue a burden to hear ... is far more damaging in labeling a work "amateurish"
It's strange but true: in a "visual" medium, lousy AUDIO often kills worse than poor visuals.
And I don't know nuthin' about AUDIO!
Here's a dark grungey visual I grabbed off video (about a Russian girl traveling with a carnival thru Indiana this summer) ... It was pretty DARK between the tents, pretty bad image, had to up the brightness beyond the sane laws of Man and Nature ... but you'd get used to
it faster than if it were equally lame audio where you couldn't hear her interview etc.
Plus, I'm betting my lil editing fx let me
"rescue" lousy video better than I could "rescue" bad audio??? Miss the dialogue and can it be salvaged, I dunno? I suppose there's always post!
So ... for what it's worth ... AUDIO is important! I need learn (and I'm trying to learn) that myself!