The thing is, good DR at high ISO should mean even better DR at low ISO.
After all, if you take read noise out of the equation, you lose 1 stop of DR for every stop of ISO you go up, and you gain 1 stop of DR for every stop of ISO you go down.
Sony/Nikon/Toshiba/Samsung/everyone else's sensor is essentially like this - you can shoot at ISO 100 and push to ISO 25600, and essentially suffer no penalty compared with shooting at ISO 25600 in the first place. The sensors are essentially ISO-less. You also have the option of pushing the highlights less than the shadows, so that you get shadow detail without blowing out the highlights.
Canon sensors are different. They hold true to the 'ideal sensor' (like the others) down to around ISO 800, but, below that, the curve deviates significantly from the linear ideal - going from ISO 800 to 400, you gain significantly less than a stop of DR, and even less when you go from 400 to 200, or 200 to 100. This is due to read noise, which becomes much more significant at low ISO, where photon shot noise is minimal.
This is why Canon sensors are great if all you do is shoot at ISO 1600 and up, but suboptimal below that. Even for a wedding photographer, that's a lot of shots you're taking with a less-than-ideal sensor.
Sony, Nikon and the rest can push their high-ISO capabilities as much as they can - every extra stop of performance at high ISO translates into an extra stop of DR at every single ISO level. If they can manage 10 stops at ISO 6400, it would translate to 16 stops at ISO 100. Canon needs to fix their low-ISO problem first, otherwise, no matter how much they improve their high-ISO capability, otherwise they'll just keep on running into the 11-12 stop barrier - just that that barrier will be pushed to a higher and higher level, until you have a sensor that can manage 11-12 stops from ISO 100 all the way to ISO 3200, but no more than that at any level.