There's snares on the blue tick during these small sections that I'd consider mapping those in, just to vary up the patterning a bit; perhaps changing the triplets there to dkd, dunno
would also make it even fucking harder because why not
actually no, don't make it harder fuck me
00:08:988 to 00:10:188
00:20:748 to 00:21:708
03:55:783 to 03:56:983
04:07:303 to 04:08:503
06:47:428 to 06:48:317
09:16:316 to 09:17:205

00:11:748 (2,3,4,5) - ddd k instead of ddk d since the snares re-enters at 00:11:988
00:17:508 (2,3,4,5) - same thing as above
00:32:508 - consider this:

since there's a subtle 2/1 pattern in the guitar repeated 3 times over the 2 measures.
00:54:708 (155,156,157,158,159) - kdddk
00:55:188 (163,164,165,166,167,168,169) - perhaps mono k would match the snares better
01:07:008 - add a note here, again, 2/1 pattern in the music and it would be consistent with 01:06:528 (92) and 01:07:488 (101)
01:17:628 (87,88,89) - perhaps link these up together since there's some heavy toms (?) in the background, would be consistent with how you did 04:30:583
01:37:668 (5) - can't help but feel that putting the k at 01:38:028 instead would lead towards the next stream better, like, for a even distance between 01:37:308 (5) and 01:38:748 (5)
02:38:405 (54) - k? 54 and 55 sounds different, not 53 and 54 imo, unless my ears deceive me
03:08:263 - don't you want to map the strings or the guitar riff upwards? Perhaps like this:

Having the pause at 03:08:863 feels more natural imo
03:18:943 (125) - d to help accentuate the k before this
03:34:663 (223,224,225,226,227,228) - kkddkk?
04:19:303 - see 00:32:508
04:50:623 (5) - see 01:37:668 (5)
06:04:095 - add a note here to match strings please
06:21:096 (149,150,151,152,153,154) - I think k dkkkd works better since the k would be isolated to match strings
06:36:150 (74,75,76,77) - oh boy ._.
06:44:095 (1) - change to k to match snares
06:50:317 - dafuq there's 1/3s here LOL, anyways 06:50:761 (5) really should be k, perhaps change 06:50:650 (3,4,5,6,1) to ddkdk or ddkkk
07:03:539 - I feel like there should be a note here to match strings, 07:03:761 too
07:40:687 (13,14) - suggest changing to k as well, 07:40:687 (13,14,15) are the toms
07:55:205 (12,13) - if I were the one mapping I would switch these two, but it doesn't really matter lol
08:09:095 (142,143,144,145,146,147) - see 06:21:096
09:19:205 - 1/3s again, I don't advise you to map those though, but like previously 09:19:539 (3,4,5,6,1) consider ddkkk since 5 should really be k imo
09:41:649 - recommended:

Don't really care what pattern you use, though 09:42:538 onward is 1/4, not 1/3
09:56:982 (95) - d would make the pattern reflect 09:56:093 (85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93)
10:17:539 (59,60,61,62,63,64) - see see 06:21:096
10:20:538 (92,1) - uh don't you feel that a heavier D is more befitting to end this 10 minute long RSI-fest?

i cant testplay this because rip streaming so im just basically going off of what feels right

metal

00:45:228 (3,4) - itd be kind of cool if you spaced it out like you did with the previous circle-circle-slider sections before this, something like this but i have no idea how 2 map so
00:46:548 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30) - holy shit can u like split this up so its not 30 notes??

i legit cant look at the first kiai without my eyes dying

02:39:463 (1,1) - idk if its just me but this feels better if its spaced out a bit more
03:03:223 (1,1) - basically same thing here

also cant look at the third kiai for the same reason dude nice

05:05:443 (1) - this spinner could probably end a bit earlier just to show the transition into the next song because 05:17:863 (1) - idk if people will expect a slider like this after a long as hell spinner lol
06:22:984 (5) - nc this to showcase jump?
06:58:094 (1,1) - wouldnt people get caught off guard by the first slider because of the repeat sliders before it?? why not just make it consistent
07:29:983 (2) - why isn't this nc'd like the other notes-after-sliders like 07:33:205 (1) - wh
07:38:983 (2) - ^
08:49:650 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - what i dont even know what this is
at least put a nc on 08:50:094 (7) - this because the entire section up to this point is nc spammy
08:52:761 (6) - if you did the above suggestion you'd have to put one here 2
09:26:982 (1,1) - same as 06:58:094 (1,1)
09:31:427 (2) - nc this cuz the note-after-slider thin g again
09:40:316 (2) - ^
09:42:982 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - ok why the hell does 09:43:204 (1,2,3,4) - go upwards instead of downwards that's just confusing af

also is the mp3 supposed to cut off the finish is that like part of the song