Both devices have a stable backrest, also a controllable point massage function, which in my opinion is more effective but the Homedics. Both have the seat vibration, the Scholl to 3 different intensities can be adjusted (for me not important). Although it can adjust the width of the rolling at the Scholl, but the Rolling function is scarcely perceptible, it is stronger in the Homedics. Both have for damping the intensity a coating which is not necessary for in the already soft Scholl seat mM.
After testing both massage seats, I have decided for the seat from Homedics. Below you can read why:
Scholl:
+ Beautiful design (white leatherette with light green seams)
+ Smaller, lighter, easier to handle, it also aids to stow
++ Special massage function: Swing very pleasant
+ Gentle massage
+ Quiet sounds
- Back for me (1.72 m) to short, massage only goes up about 5 cm below the shoulder therefore not suitable for tall people
- Headrest is with me at shoulder height, so can not lean on my head
- In any function or setting my trigger points are reached 10 cm under the shoulder
- Shiatsu function goes with me between the shoulder blades and thus rubs around the bone, which is entirely uncomfortable
- Heating function is not very strong
- Not very intuitive
Homedics 1000:
+ Very long back section also suitable for tall people
++ With full-size people like me so reached the back massage even the shoulders and even the neck
++ Massage balls reach all my trigger points
+ Heats up quickly and the heat is pleasantly intense
++ Vigorous massage
+ Intuitive operation
+ Pocket for
- Louder buzz
- Creaking noises by the friction of the balls on the fabric
- Heavy and unwieldy
Not very nice to look beige-gray Omastyle -
The advantages of the Scholl seat are therefore beside the swing massage function only in externals (sounds, style, stowability), the inner values so the massage effect for me in a massage seat decisive and therefore weigh more than the disadvantages. Therefore I have decided for the Homedics 1000 seat.
