And yet it will never flow as much as a fire hydrant because the supply line is still smaller than the fire hose. The one thing people tend to forget is that speakers are not a resistive load, they're reactive. Imagine that you have an hour to fill the pool, but trying to figure out how with a constantly changing hose size.
Many years ago, I helped put together a demo vehicle for a store that would hit the occasional show. The subwoofer system consisted of 6-Rockford Fosgate Punch 225.2 amps powering 12-Rockford Fosgate Punch DVC subwoofers. Originally, each sub was wired in series, then paralleled as a pair, and bridged on each amp. (Each amp now "seeing" a 4-ohm bridged load.) After a bit of testing it for SPL, we decided to try running all the coils in parallel just to see if the results changed. (Each amp now "seeing" a 1-ohm bridged load, which is not suggested by Rockford Fosgate.) The SPL increased a bit and the amps would run with music just fine. The downside was that when you'd play a sine sweep at high volume, you could watch 300 amp fuses turn colors before your eyes up until the point where they popped. At the target SPL frequency though, there were zero problems. After consulting with some technical guys, we were told that with the subs in the sealed enclosure they were in and the frequency we were using that the amps were actually "seeing" a 2.8-ohm bridged load during SPL runs. Whether or not they were accurate, I have no idea, that was 20ish year ago. What I do know is that it never came close to popping any fuses or putting any of the amps into protect, so maybe the tech guys were right. If they were right and we were running HC amps instead of HV amps, I can only guess that we would have been leaving power on the table.