JVC Floyd said:
I wonder if the amp summs the stereo signals together into mono or is the signal mono at the source?,Or maybe its a one channel amp.
There's nothing wrong with mono sound ,sometimes I prefer mono because it eliminates the need for stereo separation.
It's been some time since I spoke with Rob about this, but it was my understanding that it was a bridged amp to double the power of the battery he was using. I don't know where they stand today. I have seen some of the next generation stuff and all I can say is they will make this thing sound like a baby's rattle!

Rob is going for the furthest limits of portable power. I will say this, his next big unit, due out in the fall will be, as he stated "3X more powerful than the Freestyle". His words to me last night were "...on 2 this thing hurts your ears indoors and two plugged in together is unbearable"
jimmyjimmy19702010 said:
But the Bumpboxx was never about sound quality,, just sheer power!
James....
Sound quality is one of those things that is open to interpretation. After meeting the UK guys, I can say, they LOVE the really high fidelity units. Sound quality over brute force (C100, 931). They seemed to think it was pretty good as did I. Even at low volumes, it is clean. Especially when you consider how loud it goes. Back in the day, you could have clean or you could have power. If you had power you had hiss at the lower volumes. Modern amps are amazing. AND CHEAP!
For me, my ears are blown up from 25 years on stage standing next to a jet engine for a guitar player. Hell, I can't even hear that thing till its on 4
I think, if you've heard it and don't like it, then it's not your taste, if you haven't heard it, I would give it a listen, it might surprise you.