I don’t think disruption as you present it will affect the concert hall as much as one might expect (hope?). You ask, “Will our philharmonic orchestras perceive the disruptive effects of this technology and will they be able to stay on the cutting edge of music?” The classical/symphonic concert halls have been moving back from the present for a long time. They are like museums with a large historical collection in the vaults and occasional exhibits of the new. They aren’t disrupted by technological change because they collect and absorb change. The concert halls today are the same spongelike creatures. They were disrupted by recordings over a century ago, which provided the mechanism for their continued existence — the listener’s psychological investment in the recording. If the recording is new and expensive (as it was), then the listener re-listens. Once the investment is repaid in enjoyment and expectation, the listener seeks more of the same. The expectation of the new is tempered and gradually eviscerated (if that doesn’t seem right, just think of any band that tries to play its hit song in a new and different way on stage). Instead, the old becomes the product that is sought as concert hall performance deliberately slips behind the arc of composition to meet its market. As there are more historical rediscoveries, the concert hall remains familiar and has no need of new music. That they still play it at all remains a surprise; what does it gain them?

So the concert halls absorbed recording technology once they felt the disruption, and included radio and television and recordings. Jon Silpayamanant was just writing about this from the perspective of baby boomer change. http://silpayamanant.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/what-really-handicapped-classical-music/

By the time we find ourselves in 2012, that work is done. What I think is being disrupted now is the process of composition. Maybe that’s another story.

Dennis