It all depends on the circuit design if the IIC+ Reissue can support the EL34 in the class A sockets?
The Mark V90 was the first amp where Mesa abandoned the use of mixed quads. Mark IV was the intro to pentode/triode on the class A sockets. they also added a screen resistor. That amp could run EL34 in the class A sockets but perhaps they were running on the cold side. Never realized the IIC+/III simul-class amps did not have a screen resistor on the Class A sockets until I looked at the schematic.
It has been a long time since I had the Mark III, too bad I did not take any gut pictures. Looking online at gut shots, some DRG have screen resistors, and some do not. Not everything was captured in the schematics. I am not claiming to be an expert on the subject matter, just making observation from schematics without the actual amp to look at.
IIC+/III are basically the same. -67V bias voltage with a 220k/380k voltage divider on the control grid. Brings the bias down to -42, Mesa marked it with -45V. Also note there is no screen resistor on the tube. That may be a bit hot for 6L6GC tube, but the manual did indicate you can run a full quad of 6L6tubes. I did try that, and it worked but did not run it for long that way as I felt the EL34 added some better gain characteristics. Hopefully I am not breaking any rules here. The IIC+ circuit is the same as the III but there could be differences in the stripes of the III as well as change in transformers over the years.
When the Mark IV came out, I suppose the screen resistor was needed to run in pentode mode. So now there is a 1k screen resistor on the class A tubes. With that in the circuit, the class A power output was raised a bit more than the 15W of the IIC+ and III. Bais voltage on the class A tubes is closer to -51V but it may be less than that if measured on the amp itself. Mark IVB could be run with EL34 + 6L6 tubes just like the Mark III, but I assume the bias may be on the cold side for the EL34. Also, there may be an error in the schematic for the IVB. Perhaps not? the 1k screen resistor on the class A socket in pentode mode appears to connect directly to the screen of the CLass AB tube and that all current will pass through the 470 ohm resistor to the B voltage. Makes me wonder if that is how the amp is really configured.
The Mark V90 is very similar but the 220k was changed to a 150k and the bias voltage was reduced down to -51 (well on paper anyway). Not what I measured with mine. Here is a table of tube voltages. the class A sockets have -47V on the control grid, Sort of makes you think it will support a mixed quad of EL34 and 6L6 tubes. I would not doubt it would work, and some have tried it. So why did Mesa not state this in the manual? Reliability issues? Not sure if the transformers are the same between the Mark IVB and the Mark V90. They may be different. Plate and screen voltages may be the reason. Still above 450V on the screen. Also, it could be due to the 10W mode (there will be no grid bias voltage on the tubes used in Class A 10W except for one that is used as a ballast. The 2009 Mark V schem can be found on the net. Not the 2010 version and I do not want to be the one to provide it. But for reference to the table, what the 2009 states is V7 is actually V8. V9 is actually V10, V10 is actually V11, and V8 is actually V9. The old schem has two V7 tubes. One is the phase inverter and the other is a power tube.
There have not been any leaks on the Mark VII schematics. Even if I had them, I would not dare make them public. I don't have them so no worries.
If one could run a mixed quad of 6L6 and EL34 in the Mark VII, not willing to try it. I am sure the EL34 tubes will work but will be running on the cold side (assumed) like they were with the Mark IVB. Not sure about the Mark V90 as I never tried to experiment with that. I personally am not willing to find out what would be the end result of the Mark VII with a mixed quad (6L6 + EL34). I have run mixed quads but they are all 6L6GC tubes. It did not make much of a huge difference though and only 90W was it notable.
Since the IIC+ lacks a bias switch, is this to assume it is possible to run a mixed quad of tubes? No manual out yet so best not to jump to conclusions until they release the manual assuming it is correct and without errors. Would not be the first time that happened but will at least give you a head up.
Just for reference, the STR445 tubes do have some similar traits to the 6CA7 in tone but it depends on the amp in question. Same tubes in the JP2C, it is ok, not the same characteristic sound I would prefer. Sort of has a thin sound. In the Mark VII it has more depth and character. the STR415 in the JP2C adds in controlled depth and character I would think gets closer to the real deal but does not have Vol 1 for pre-gain tailoring. Sort of wonder if the gain pulls alter the voltage divider used to replace the Vol 1 pot. Swap in the STR415 into the Mark VII, not bad but sound on the boxy side. Would not say they are epic in that amp. It may just be the difference between the Class AB 100W and Simul-class 90W. What does seem to sound very close to the STR415 loaded in the JP2C is a Quad of Mesa STR454 (=C= 6L6GC). That adds in some depth and cuts a bit of the 6CA7 mids a bit just enough to the point the JP2C (STR415) is about the same as the IIC+ on the Mark VII (STR454). I became fond of the STR445 in the Mark VII. Actually, the STR447 (with bias set to EL34) sounds much the same. Unlike the Mark V where you can actually tell the difference and note the change in power tubes and characteristic tone of the EL34 tubes from the 6L6GC tubes. Then again the STR440 have their own sound to them. STR441 was a step in the right direction. Actually, I tried a quad of those in the Mark VII and thought it was decent. Nothing like the STR454 tubes though as they added some depth to the grind I was getting with the STR415 loaded in the JP2C. Still, the STR445 are holding up well and they have gone through plenty of abuse. It does bring be back to the Mark III DRG days but that was one amp I probably could not figure out. Never realized how Metallica made use of the IIC+ so if I knew the trick, I would have tried it. BTW, it works on the Mark VII but lack of Vol 1 may be the missing link with the VII and JP2C.
So, when the IIC+ Reissue rolls out the doors, reality will set in how this amp sounds. I am not expecting to sound identical to a IIC+ DRG, I do not have one to compare it with. Do I care? NOPE. Hearing it in person will reveal is it real in sonic character or just a copy that fell short due to compromise in design? There may be some reason to hold off on getting NOS tubes from the 80's-90's until you find out how it performs with the tubes it comes with. I have the STR415, perfect for the JP2C, just not so epic in the Mark VII. Just in the description of the amp, I have a hunch it the output section will be similar to the Mark VII but that is just an assumption.