When you properly wrote $$2^{(2x-1)}\log( x)=\log(2)$$ you made the function much more linear than the original one and this is very good for any root finding method.
By inspection, you know the the solution is much closer to $1$ than to $2$. So, without resorting to numerical method, make a series expansion around $x=1$, truncate to some order (here, I used the expansion to $O((x-1)^5)$) and use power series reversion to get
$$x=1+\frac{L}{2}+\frac{L^2}{8}-\frac{23 L^3}{48}-\frac{143
L^4}{384}+\frac{29 L^5}{48}+L^6-\frac{4
L^7}{3}+O\left(L^{8}\right)$$ where $L=\log(2)$.
This would give $x=1.266171$ which is not fantastic.
But we can make it up to any order and get better and better results. For example, expanding to $O((x-1)^{15})$ the result would be $\color{red}{1.269}36$
We could do it simpler using, instead of Taylor series, simple Padé approximant. A very simple one is
$$2^{(2x-1)}\log( x)\sim P_2=\frac{2 (x-1)+\frac{32 L^3-24 L^2-4 L-1 }{(24 L^2-12
L-1)}(x-1)^2 } {1-\frac{32 L^3-24 L^2+6 L+1}{(24 L^2-12 L-1)} (x-1)+\frac{96 L^4-96 L^3+36 L^2+12 L-1}{6 \left(24 L^2-12 L-1\right)}(x-1)^2 }$$ whose error is $\frac{88}{101} (x-1)^5$.
Now writing
$$\text{rhs}=L$$ we have an approximate solution at the price of a simple quadratic equation in $(x-1)$. This would give $x=1.27011$.
Using $P_3$ (whose error is $\frac{3}{106} (x-1)^7$ ) would require the solution of a cubic equation in $(x-1)$. This would give $x=\color{red}{1.26941}63$.