Les Paul players, or at least those bored and opinionated enough to join dedicated Les Paul forums, claim to be able to hear the difference. They get upset, or shall we say triggered, by anybody that suggests that capacitor construction type has no impact on tone for capacitors of the same value. Naturally the obscure long-extinct capacitors on the 1950s have a better tone than the shriller, harsher and colder sounding modern capacitors. If nothing else, a modern ceramic capacitor costs cents, retail, whereas those old capacitors are four times the size, have weird lines painted on them and cost anywhere from $20 to $100 each. They have to be better, and straight-talking no-messin' guys (who just happen to own companies with cheesy hillbilly names like 'Rebel Guitar Coalition', who just happen to sell aftermarket components and wiring harnesses for Gibson guitars) also happen to agree. The fact that these Les Paul guys can claim to hear the difference through 30 feet of coily guitar cable, 100 watts of boutique Marshall clone with idiosyncratic and highly characterised tone, a boutique Tubescreamer clone, and the nasty stock buffer in a Crybaby really beggars belief. Especially given that most of them must be pretty deaf given 1) their general age and 2) the number of Nugent concerts they happily attended back in the day.
Don't fall for the hype. I'm being totally harsh here, and I don't mean the OP in any way as he's asked an innocent question, but if you think $50 of capacitor is getting between you and better musicianship then you might need to wake up. Bassists seem to be generally smarter at 1) accepting innovation where a concrete argument exists in its favour and 2) weeding out the sort of faddy elitist cork-sniffing nonsense that some corners of the guitar universe take a perverse pride in adopting and endorsing.