On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 15:51:10 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

Few Caps exhibit 0.01uF (when so marked) to transients (where it is
presumed they will exhibit 1/2*pi*f*c reactance to the risetime).

True. They all have some internal resistance to overcome.

It goes beyond that. Extrapolating from power applications hides the
defects of ceramic.

At HF/VHF and above, successful applications comes from throwing uF
solutions at pF problems. Ceramic's performance reveals inductive
reactance above 1-10 MHz. ESR also exhibits the same turn-around in
the same frequency range. Ceramic temperature coefficient is (Y5V)
goes into the toilet in weather that most of the south and eastern
seaboard has seen this summer. XR7 voltage coefficient causes
capacity to plummet at the voltages you offer for static. Over time,
ceramics lose capacity for simply having been in service for a while.

Aside from that, they work fine.

I was a big fan of porcelain caps from AVX in big
power amps. If you wanna handle current, there's nothing better.

However, those ceramics are 1,000 times (min.) larger than what you
have recommended. They serve an entirely different agenda.

AVX discusses these issues in much the same terms (for those larger
caps too) at:
http://www.avx.com/docs/techinfo/mlc-tant.pdf

Incidentally, I don't think they make 0.01uF silver mica caps. The
biggest I played with were in antenna tuners at 4700pF

Where there is every chance that one silver mica head-to-head with the
ceramic actually exhibit better performance (protecting the diodes).
Perhaps with the scarcity of silver mica, however, 10uF ceramics would
make do (it is not like any precision is demanded to force a selection
of 0.01uF which is boilerplate recommendation from the 50s).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC