Horrible early stereo mix

Why don't record re-releases correct the horrible stereo separation from many early stereo recordings?
You know the records: half the band in the left channel; half the band in the right channel; nothing in the center.
All the early Beatles in stereo are like that. I just got a reissue of a Dinah Washington record. The fidelity is great but the stereo separation is crazy.
I know these recordings were probably mixed for a console stereo where the speakers were only 24" apart.
But why keep this awful flaw?
The only way I can listen to these records is to move my speakers together.
Why not buying mono versions after all?
Mono switch on preamp?
The early Beatles' stereo mix is tricky to correct. The original 4-tracks are long gone. They were never intended to be mixed in stereo--George Martin has said he made the stereo mix as an aid to a quicker, easier mono mix. The U.S. wanted stereo and that's what they got (plus added reverb).

I did make personal cassettes of the early LP's in which I panned everything a bit more to the center so it's not so extreme sounding. I suppose they could do that, but it's far from the ideal solution. With the proper software you could do it yourself.

Personally, I'd rather hear the much-maligned stereo mix than the mono.
Many early masters are 3 or 4 track which make it impossible to do what you want. It wasn't until 8 track and 16 track came along which allowed placing each instrument on a separate track that allowed for placement of a track anywhere in the stereo plane
I don't have a problem with those recordings. I kind of like the separated sound and I appreciate the recordings for what they are. Many early jazz recordings are that way also and there is something special about how natural those recordings sound.
I've always noticed that on Dinah Washington recordings going back to my childhood, Mom was a huge fan and I came on board because, well I had little choice at the time. Her voice is always far left and sounds separate from the rest of the mix. For her recordings, mono would definitely sound better. I too appreciate the recordings for what they are. In the case of Dinah, her interpretations and voice make the shortcomings of the recordings a moot point to me.
I have no problem with the way early stereo records were produced. The early ones are what they are.
I accept them for that.
Same for pre long play.. Stuff from 78s is just that. i love them anyway.
Glad my glass is half full is way better than complaining about it being half empty..
This reminds me of something a college friend said in the 70's. He was from Mexico City and he said that the city had installed a new stereo music system on the metro buses. But when he finally heard it he realized they were sending one channel to the north/south buses and the other channel to the east/west.

Now THAT could be off-putting.