I have looked into getting a meter. But I have such a standard process its likely not worth it.
1. 95% of my prints are 5x7 using a speed easel typically not moving the elevation.
2. When possible use the same print developer at 20C
3. Use only two types paper and know the f/stop speed adjustment when changing paper.
4. Use an incident meter when shooting one of two types of film using one general purpose developer…this makes for consistent exposures on -135. David Vestal preached a good negative is easy to print.
5. Print 3x a week…..your eyes become calibrated with frequent repetition.
I cut a 5x7 up in 5 test strips. Use one strip to cover an area of important mid, low and high values. It normally takes 1 or 2 strips to find the right exposure. My negatives are uniform and typically print well on a #3 contrast filter. After the test strip I eyeball contrast adjustment.
When things are going well I average 2 prints to get to a baseline keeper. At that point I evaluate for dodging and burning. I avoid heavy makeup on the print. I may need a test strip for manipulation but often guess and it works out. If I dodge and burn more than just a simple adjustment it may take 2 or 3 prints.
I usually get to a final print from individual negatives in 15 min…..30 min if I’m having a bad day. Granted, this is enlarging to 5x7 which is not challenging for a printer.
If I think I have a really nice image on another day I batch enlarge selected negatives to 7.5 inches across on 8x10 paper. Slightly bigger image with wider white margins. Again I have a good idea of the change in time for the increased enlargement factor.
I think I’m reasonable efficient without a meter.
If during a print session I changed neg format, made big enlargements on 11x14, and often varied the enlarger head I may feel different about meters.