I don't see this happening. The propeller physics aren't changing. If you are using the quadrotor architechure, directly lifting your playload with no wings, there's a sound-per-kg number that can't be engineered away.
Though I guess high and light applications would disturbe less.
I read the Wikipedia article on Active Noise Control. The third paragraph under Explanation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_noise_control#Explanati... mentions that if it's at the source, it needs to be just as loud as the source (as opposed to being by the ear, in which case even a whisper might be enough).
In addition to being as loud as the source, you need to blast it in all directions. So I guess it's hard/impossible to perfectly hit the same sound waves in all directions. If you ever miss, you'll just be doubling the noise.
Maybe that's why you'll be hard-pressed to find anything in a fixed installation that uses active noise cancellation at the source - even if it's heavy, periodic, and uses a lot of power anyway - such as a home air conditioner. Noise cancellation close to the ear seems much easier for this reason, and maybe at the source it's just impossible.
Buuuut... that’s not really viable for anything civilian or even commercial.
(There existence is still not officially acknowledged of course, but many pictures exist.)
I was very curious about the technology they used to reduce the noise, as black hawks are very loud.
However, air passes over a propeller much, much faster than over a wing, and creates shock waves in a way that wings don't.
The major issue is that until drones came around, you didn’t have to worry very often about large number of high performance aircraft operating throughout civilian airspace, at very low altitudes in crowded areas.
That’s still pretty fast, of course. That points to using bigger props as a potential way to cut noise.