Sleepweaver’s novel feature seems to be extensive use of soft cloth as the seal against the skin, but unfortunately much of their sales and promotion effort is vague, glib, and similar to the competition’s.
(Their pressure claims seem quite similar to makers who have a thin inward-folded cushion, for example their “How it Works/The Science...” The statement “The pressure inside the mask is the same at all points.” is irrelevant – by basic physics it must be, as “inside the mask” is only air which equalizes easily in any design. They may well mean that this mask has more equal pressure against the skin, because it apparently is not constrained by the shape of a large shell and limited seal depth, but that’s not what they say. Do marketing weenies every get people with solid technical understanding to vet their verbiage?)
I don’t see details of how it fits over the nose, perhaps this mask is more adaptable (the only diagram I’ve seen suggest it fits lower on the nose than many masks but not as low as ComfortCurve and similar which are “end of the nose” designs.
What is the supposed advantage of this design? Reading between the lines of the brief description it is fabric-covered flexible bladder material that is claimed to adapt well to different shapes and sizes, some literature uses the term “bladder” while other literature claims it is all cloth (nonsense – it has a rigid part the hose attaches to). Also the cloth feels better on the face and is easier on the face they claim – there is nice micro-fiber cloth available but they don’t detail how soft their cloth is (actually the FAQ page says it is the material used to make winter ski clothing – but which side of the clothing? their press release calls it “elastic cloth”).
And they claim low noise – is that achieved by diffusing through an area of cloth not covered by the rubbery material? (Actually their “How it Works/The Science...” shows a rigid chamber – at some point a hose connection is of course needed.)
The headgear looks very good for staying on the head, as it goes around the ears low on the head, and they claim adaptability against side force which is a major problem for people who sleep on their side.
However it appears to be bottom-feed only, whereas people who move around during sleeping need over-the-head hose routing.
They also claim low weight and small folded size, which are good attributes.
David Groll claims they listened to users, which is very commendable (though some manufacturers who also say that did not listen well enough).
But here’s yet another maker who does not provide an adequate range of sizes – I don’t understand that mentality, in the sea of products why limit sales and risk negative recommendations? (Note that cpap.com’s writeup claims fits smaller faces but then quotes someone who said it was too large, probably the headgear lacks adequate adjustment for small heads.)
Yet another inaccurate sales writeup – claims it is ‘composed of cloth material”, but all cloth I know of does not hold air so it must have rubbery material inside (which does not need to be thick as the cloth will take the stress). And the supposed explanation on Sleepweaver’s web site of how it works is the same as of other manufacturers who have a flexible seal.
So it sounds very promising but the maker has not explained it well enough, and some of their glib claims and sloppy literature make me wary. If I’d known it would be at the Seattle 2009 conference I’d have attended.
There are many products out there, some with innovative features ruined by poor design of basic apects (ADAMS has good pillow but bad headgear) or a fundamental shortcoming of the feature (how to keep ComfortCurve and its similar competitor from sliding up and blocking your nostrils?) - sellers need to assure potential customers that they’ve really got their act together.
