OK, I'll be blunt, no politics in the following:
I loath other translations; NIV psalms make me want to puke, as if they were written by those who don't have heterosexual preferences, or by scholars who'd sooner translate the Koran after finishing their biblical grants. Bubble-gum translations they all are, adulterers and slanderers of the redemptive glories of the Christ they unknowingly demean (in my less-than-meager wretchedly biased opinion).
Now which version do you ascribe?:
Darby's slick intellectual but clinically dead version,
RV, RSV's watered-down KJV sequals,
Bishop's pre-KJV pre-English jargon.
NIV's tortuously twisted narrative version,
Stale Catholic Dewy and RA versions, with their perverse apocryphias
Mormon and other so-called cult bibles with their wanton additions.
Living, New Living and/or English Bibles that are merely cute commentaries.
Received texts: word for word matches of Hebrew and Greek.
Expanded/amplified Bibles translated by modern (liberated?) women? (Not to down-play women who are actually more attuned to redemptive sufferings than men, but the Bible was written via men's hands)
But despite the translational errors that occur in all translations: the KJV has a no really proven transcriptional glitches. It's translation suits our frolic-driven adulterous generation, being most pure, unadulterated, grave, poetic, and abruptly to the point while taking translational liberties insofar as redemptive poetry becomes enhanced.
The same is true of the "Chinese Union Version", "Luther's German Version", etc. Every major language is blessed with a peculiarly powerful version, usually in an older tongue of that language. Those versions, like the KJV, inexplicably utilize inspired (if you will) translational liberties to impart additional redemptive excellencies of Jesus Christ in both testaments.