typically, I'd agree with you... but I never thought I'd see the day when a stack of Marshall's was not the absolute standard for guitar. Now I see so many more with Boogie and Peavey (of all things)...
Watch out I feel another of my looong posts coming on...
The classic amps that I see and use most often are the Fenders, Vox etc and Boogies have been around for years..I've actually never owned a Marshall. Not that my playing is in anyway trend setting.
Two things here, musicians are less fussy and more inclined to change or try new amps than they are a guitar. The guitar is a very ergonomic thing it's very hands on, very personal. An amp is to a greater degree just an amp. You can replace like for like very easily. Secound, the developments in solid state and the silicon chip has driven the audio industry in many new directions. This has been reflected in the quality and price of equipment available to the musician. In a nutshell the Guitar industry has been around for years and much of what we accept now has been fiddled with for hundreds of years. The electronic industry is relatively new. In the electric guitar the two overlap but much of the ground work has been done especially the ergonomic thing and the physics of the instrument is well understood.
The whole subject interests me, so why do I believe that the self tuning modification will not become COMMON, apart from the obvious statements I've made. When I was involved in academia and research into musical instruments and acoustics, one of the first questions students were asked to examine is
"what drives change to musical instruments? The musician, the composer or the maker?" This is a fascinating question. Without getting to involved it nearly always comes down to the composer. Without a compositional need an instrument doesn't evolve and slips into decline. The Composer has a vision, he approaches the musician in an attempt to realise it and he in turn approaches the instrument maker to make him something he can play it on. The other thing that drives change is the arrival of new materials. The former is much more common. So, in this case gunn naming Sonny Landrath is closest to the real deal. Sonny has a unique approach to guitar playing which a few share but it is far from mainstream. For that reason alone I can't see this being a common option in the future. If composers/.songwriters want it it will catch on, if they don't it won't.
The other common question new students are asked is to go away and invent a new instrument. This is done to prove that most things have been tried and most new stuff is a development of existing ideas. You wouldn't believe the number of students who arrive thinking they can change the world of music over night. The first realisation they have is that everything has been done before or their new ideas are in reality simply "one trick ponies" The robot guitar fits into the latter for me. I could be proved wrong.
I'm not saying all this is correct or in anyway meant to stifle the development of the guitar, on the contrary If you start with these basic understandings real and valid development can take place.
Wow what a long post...Hope I haven't bored you all too much....