If you already have Waves SSL G-Channel any point in picking up the SSL G-Equalizer?
eg lighter CPU load or ?

Good question! Curious to hear any feedback as well.
 
I've read in countless places that people prefer the 'E' over the 'G'. IIRC, the G was newer and used more on rock music vs. the E on rock, pop, and whatever else was channeled through it. Just on paper, the E's specs are more desirable to me vs. the G.  For example, I think the "Bell" mode of the Low Frequency (LF) and High Frequency (HF) portions of the EQ are more useful and musical than the "/3" and "x3" functions. For big trims either high or low, I'll just use FF Pro-Q2 anyway. Keep in mind that something like Pro-Q2 did not exist in the 80's; It wasn't imagined nor conceived, even at the slightest degree!
 
Good read here, if you haven't already: https://www.waves.com/ssl-e-channel-or-g-channel

Oh, I just realized you were asking about G channel vs. G EQ. Oops!

I have only really used the E channel. And I really like it.
 
Not used the G channel much at all. 

2:43AM
Oh, I just realized you were asking about G channel vs. G EQ. Oops!

NP.  Good article linked in your other post!

TheSteven

2:43AM
Oh, I just realized you were asking about G channel vs. G EQ. Oops!

NP.  Good article linked in your other post!

Yes, thanks for the link to a very good article. Love reading that stuff.