Or you could stick with the Septuagint and avoid all these hassles. Further, you would also being using the text which is in all likelihood the closest to the original Hebrew scriptures.
And where did the “Septuagint” come from?
From Jewish scribes who translated from the “Hebrew” texts.
Below is an excellent article on the preservation and transmission of the Scriptures down through the centuries.
http://www.defendingyourfaith.org/Old%20Testament.htm
The Dead Sea Scrolls have also served to show the accuracy of transmission over time.
Before their discovery in 1947, the oldest Biblical Hebrew texts were only about a 1,000 years old. DSS go all the way back to 200 BC. 1200 years earlier.
The great Isaiah scroll of the DSS is a nearly whole complete copy of the book of the prophet Isaiah.
Other than minor variants such as spelling or punctuation, the DSS are in sinc with the Masoretic Text. Serving to show the care taken in the transmission of the text.
The Septuagint? You're kidding, right? You realise that this is the "translation" which was so recognisably poor that a 2nd century heretic actually had to re-translate the Greek book of Daniel from the Hebrew, just to make it comprehensible?