Hi Tim

John Hobbins has a blog post that might be helpful

http://ancienthebrewpoetry.typepad.com/ancient_hebrew_poetry/2011/04/why-the-king-james-version-remains-unsurpassed.html

The best study of of the KJV’s rhythm/stress/euphony (and how it relates to the source languages) I have seen is by Gerald Hammond in his Making of the English Bible, which I heartily recommend. Hammond’s book is out of print, but widely available through libraries. A brief sense of what Hammond accomplishes can be found in his chapter in Harvard University Press’s Literary Guide to the Bible.

While I have not personally seen it yet, I understand that both volumes of the Norton Critical Edition of the Bible (expected in October) will have extensive material on this. (I have quite high expectations for that edition.)

I assume you are familiar with the audio Bible feature at Biblegateway. Max McLean’s reading of the KJV is quite wonderful IMO.

That point is fully argued in God’s Secretaries by Adam Nicolson. My copy is in a box somewhere at the moment, but this is from an Amazon review,

In spite of King James’s chronic spendthrift ways and Robert Cecil, his financial chief’s consequent difficulties in financing the work of all the translators, the final General Meeting of twelve members of the Companies assembled in 1610. They sat in the newly built Stationers’ Hall and listened as chapter after chapter, book after book, was read to them. If all agreed, the reader continued; if some one objected there was discussion, suggestion and alteration. Nicolson stresses a point of prime importance here: what these men were doing was giving their approval to a text that was meant first of all to be heard. “The listening divines in the Stationers’ Hall were, in one sense, the new book’s first audience, not its readers, but its hearers, participating in, and shaping, the ceremony of the word.” In notes taken by John Bois, one of them, it is clear that constant deference was paid to the Latin and Greek words that came before their translation into English and that “the English, in other words, was itself subservient to the original Greek.”