[Gratz]
00:05:100 - I dunno about this SV honestly, I feel like the change is quite drastic considering how slow the previous ones were, and the music hasn't really changed enough to have such a drastic difference. Maybe you want to increase the SV of the slower section instead though.
00:05:100 (1) - I don't hear a sound on the repeat. I think a 2/1 slider would work better for this held sound.
00:06:382 (2) - There's a snapping issue here. I think the note you're mapping to starts 1/16 later and it ends somewhere on 00:06:542. I'm honestly not too sure what the exact snapping is for this, but it should definitely be looked at.
00:06:895 (3) - I think this note is barely audible, and shouldn't be clickable.
00:09:203 (3,4) - Slider ends on a stronger beat than the start. Three circles, or having 3 be the 1/2 slider would work better imo.
00:36:895 (6,7) - I don't really get this, since you extended the slider, which makes me think that you wanted to accentuate the vocal here, but because of your placement of 7, the player won't follow the slider entirely, so it kinda takes emphasis away from it.
00:36:639 (5) - Stack or use your overlap concept with 00:34:844 (3) for a more recognizable relationship between 00:35:869 (1,2,5)?
00:51:767 (2,3,4,5,1) - A slight spacing increase would be nice here, since though this is less intense than 00:39:459 (1,2,3), these sounds are pretty important.
02:59:715 (2,3,4,5,6) - Sloppy stream.
04:04:330 (2,3,4) - Triple is close to unnoticeable, why not do a repeat here instead?
04:19:971 (8,9,1) - This jump is pretty big, I don't think the song does something that warrants a change this big, for sure.

[Thanks]
00:23:049 (1,2) - Right now this looks mapped to whatever that string instrument is, but I think you could do something to include the flute, since it's strong. A spaced triple or changing the second 1/4 slider come to mind.
00:33:818 (1,2,3) - Having these as lower spacing would put more emphasis on 00:35:356 (4).
01:06:639 (1) - These are some pretty strong sounds and I don't think a 1/1 repeat does these justice.
02:04:074 (1,2,3,4) - How about a more intense rhythm than just having repeats again? Song is slowly increasing in intensity here, and since the measure right before was full of repeats, the player should be used to this type of rhythm. Personally i'd use 1/3 slider + 1 circle rhythms in place of these.
02:06:126 (1,2,3,4) - Not a fan of the intensity decrease here. Song is picking up, so it makes sense for you to switch to following these rhythms, but I think more of these should be clickable.
02:36:382 (2,2,3,4) - I think people will get triggered by this and prefer that you nudge the triple under RLC's slider.
02:39:203 (2,3) - How come there's a lack of emphasis here?
02:47:151 (1,2,3,4) - I don't these are equal intensity, but there's equal spacing and angles here .
02:52:792 (2,3,4,5,1) - Sloppy stream.
03:12:279 (3,4,1) - Isn't it a bit late for deciding to space triples this much? Song hasn't gotten that much more intense.
03:12:792 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - Fix your pentagon.
03:18:946 (1,2,3,4) - Curve doesn't look too good and i'm not really sure if the pattern really makes sense for this part of the music, since 1 isn't a vocal and there aren't slight intensity increases between each note. Rather, I think 3 needs quite a bit more emphasis than it's getting.
03:22:279 (7) - Strong note on the white tick that isn't clickable.
03:23:048 (1,1) - Similar sounds, why are the shapes so different?
04:03:561 (1) - I think if you're going to have an "introduction" to the next part, you should start it at the beginning of this warping sound, even if the repeats themselves are in the tin cans or whatever is being mapped currently. Not sure exactly where it is, but i think it starts somewhere around 04:03:048.
04:21:510 (4,5,6,7,8) - Spacing like this is absolutely massive for the intensity of this section, please bring it down, or at least have it make more sense with RLC's parts.