That's exactly the one I was referring to (played in two octaves, yes?). My ears interpret that as a blues #4/b5. Of course, as part of a D# arp it's not bluesy as a whole, the first two notes being E7 alterations. So the whole thing sounds defiantly "out" on the chord (it's not "resolved" in any sense on the chord). But in hearing it as "blues" (before I got into checking just what it was), I guess I'm hearing the G natural and the D# as "A blues" notes, while the Bb somehow resists mental analysis.(It's not resolved, as chromaticisms usually are.) Naturally, as an arpeggio, it has its own structural integrity, even more so when repeated. You resolve the D# to E on the Am, a standard resolution of an outside phrase (in jazz or blues). IMO, that takes care of any "wtf?" response one might feel on first hearing the phrase. "No such thing as a wrong note" as the saying goes - provided it's resolved correctly. (My ears kind of forget the unresolved A#/Bb, and are satisfied by the D#>E move.) I'm not arguing here. This is just the way I hear it, the way my listening experience makes sense of it. My listening experience of jazz is some way short of yours, and that's significant. IOW, this kind of thing will "work" according to how often one has heard it done, essentially. (That's pretty much how and why ALL music "works"!) I've heard way more blues (and folk, pop, R&B, rock etc) than jazz, so it's the blues elements that slot right in as familiar, and the more arcane jazz ones that pass me by: either they sound wrong (if totally new to my ears) or they sound strange (and cool). This is one is kind of between the two.