Will I be satisfied with a 24-70 II over a 24L II and 50L combo?

Think I could relate because it happens to me.

In the past, when I had only resources to own 1 camera, I used the 24-70L (Mark I in those days) to cover events and concerts because it's just convenient and most of the shots happen at that moment. If you miss it, you won't get another chance at it.

But later on, when I had more resources, I use 24L and 50L on two cameras. It is my preferred combination because of bokeh and low light capabilities.

I would take 24-70 on a FF as the 1st option because photographers just cannot miss shots for clients.

I shoot concerts, using primes, on one body. Have to say I've not missed the shot yet. Perhaps that's as much to do with luck as anything else but is only takes a few seconds to change a lens for the next series of shots you need. I'm sure, like most, you've got to know the routine of a live show after a few shoots. Pace yourself, there is plenty of time.

Perhaps someone here who has the 24-70 2.8 II L and some primes might give a few pros and cons for each? That might help to answer the question the OP is asking.